Richburg v. Morgenthau

184 A.D.2d 316
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 16, 1992
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 184 A.D.2d 316 (Richburg v. Morgenthau) 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
Richburg v. Morgenthau, 184 A.D.2d 316 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (George F. Roberts, J.), entered on or about January 24, 1992, denying, without prejudice, petitioners’ application for production of Grand Jury minutes, and granting respondents’ cross motion for a protective order against such production, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In connection with a civil suit pending in Federal court, petitioners moved for release of the minutes of a Grand Jury investigation into the death of their son. In order to warrant such disclosure, it is well settled that the seeking party must demonstrate a compelling and particularized need therefor strong enough to overcome the presumption of confidentiality cloaking Grand Jury proceedings (Matter of District Attorney of Suffolk County, 58 NY2d 436, 444). Petitioners’ application was properly denied, and the cross motion properly granted, since the bare claim that Grand Jury minutes are needed to prepare for trial or would be useful in impeaching witnesses on cross-examination is insufficient to establish compelling need of proof that is dispositive and precludes an exercise of discretion by the court in favor of disclosure of the minutes (see, Melendez v City of New York, 109 AD2d 13, 19-20). [317]*317Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Badia
2021 NY Slip Op 03420 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Crespo v. New York City Hous. Auth.
2020 NY Slip Op 06346 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Lustberg v. Curry
235 A.D.2d 615 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Arkadiy Yushavayev v. City of New York
234 A.D.2d 289 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Lungen v. Kane
217 A.D.2d 849 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
184 A.D.2d 316, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richburg-v-morgenthau-nyappdiv-1992.