Rembrandt Painting & Paperahanging, Inc. v. Department of Investigation

46 A.D.2d 677, 359 N.Y.S.2d 910, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3913
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 21, 1974
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 46 A.D.2d 677 (Rembrandt Painting & Paperahanging, Inc. v. Department of Investigation) 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
Rembrandt Painting & Paperahanging, Inc. v. Department of Investigation, 46 A.D.2d 677, 359 N.Y.S.2d 910, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3913 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR 2304 to quash three subpoenas duces tecum, petitioners appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered June 13, 1974, as directed petitioners to turn over to respondent all books and records called for in the subpoenas and imposed costs and a penalty upon petitioners. Order modified by (1) striking therefrom the second decretal paragraph and substituting therefor a provision granting respondent’s cross motion only to the extent of directing petitioners to comply fully with the subpoenas duces tecum and denying said cross motion in all other respects and (2) striking from the third decretal paragraph thereof the words “ turn over ” and by substituting therefor the word produce ”. As so- modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. After being served with the three subpoenas duces tecum, petitioners made the motion under review, to quash the subpoenas, as they were entitled to do under CPLR 2304. Accordingly, it was error for the Special Term to impose costs and a penalty on petitioners at the conclusion of the proceedings at Special Term. Under the subpoenas duces tecum, respondent would have the right to photostat or inspect the books and records in 'the presence of appellants, but not the right to retain them. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Shapiro, Christ and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

Related

112 West 34th Street Co. v. Michael
108 Misc. 2d 822 (New York Supreme Court, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
46 A.D.2d 677, 359 N.Y.S.2d 910, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3913, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rembrandt-painting-paperahanging-inc-v-department-of-investigation-nyappdiv-1974.