Robles v. Hirsch

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Robles v. Hirsch

19 A.D.3d 132, 795 N.Y.S.2d 450, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5913

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

DecidedJune 2, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 19 A.D.3d 132 (Robles v. Hirsch) 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

Robles v. Hirsch, 19 A.D.3d 132, 795 N.Y.S.2d 450, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5913 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Order, [133]*133Supreme Court, New York County (Charles J. Tejada, J.), entered on or about August 6, 2004, which, in a proceeding to compel respondent Chief Medical Examiner’s production of records relating to petitioner’s conviction of murder, granted respondent’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner, who concedes that the autopsy records he seeks are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Law (NY City Charter § 557 [g]; Matter of Huston v Turkel, 236 AD2d 283 [1997], lv denied 90 NY2d 809 [1997]; cf. Administrative Code of City of NY § 17-205), fails to show any other basis for allowing him access. Concur—Saxe, J.P, Sullivan, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

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

Order, Order, [133]*133Supreme Court, New York County (Charles J. Tejada, J.), entered on or about August 6, 2004, which, in a proceeding to compel respondent Chief Medical Examiner’s production of records relating to petitioner’s conviction of murder, granted respondent’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner, who concedes that the autopsy records he seeks are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Law (NY City Charter § 557 [g]; Matter of Huston v Turkel, 236 AD2d 283 [1997], lv denied 90 NY2d 809 [1997]; cf. Administrative Code of City of NY § 17-205), fails to show any other basis for allowing him access. Concur—Saxe, J.P, Sullivan, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.3d 132, 795 N.Y.S.2d 450, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5913, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robles-v-hirsch-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack