Longwood Associates v. A.J. Apparel, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Longwood Associates v. A.J. Apparel, Inc.

249 A.D.2d 453, 671 N.Y.S.2d 303, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4296

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 20, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 249 A.D.2d 453 (Longwood Associates v. A.J. Apparel, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Longwood Associates v. A.J. Apparel, Inc., 249 A.D.2d 453, 671 N.Y.S.2d 303, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4296 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an enforcement proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 52, the defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.), dated April 1, 1997, as, upon re-argument, adhered to a determination of the same court dated January 30, 1997, denying the defendant’s motion to quash or modify a subpoena.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to quash or modify the subject subpoena. Under the disclosure standards applicable to subpoenas issued pursuant to CPLR 5224, the plaintiff is entitled to disclosure of “all matter relevant to the satisfaction of the judgment” (CPLR 5223). The plaintiff adequately demonstrated the relevance of the requested information. Mangano, P. J., Miller, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In an enforcement proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 52, the defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.), dated April 1, 1997, as, upon re-argument, adhered to a determination of the same court dated January 30, 1997, denying the defendant’s motion to quash or modify a subpoena.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to quash or modify the subject subpoena. Under the disclosure standards applicable to subpoenas issued pursuant to CPLR 5224, the plaintiff is entitled to disclosure of “all matter relevant to the satisfaction of the judgment” (CPLR 5223). The plaintiff adequately demonstrated the relevance of the requested information. Mangano, P. J., Miller, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D.2d 453, 671 N.Y.S.2d 303, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4296, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/longwood-associates-v-aj-apparel-inc-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack