Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskatjer Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn L. L. P.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskatjer Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn L. L. P.

235 A.D.2d 355, 653 N.Y.S.2d 12, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 630

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 235 A.D.2d 355 (Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskatjer Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn L. L. P.) 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

Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskatjer Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn L. L. P., 235 A.D.2d 355, 653 N.Y.S.2d 12, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 630 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered on or about June 5, 1996, which directed respondent to turn over to petitioners’ counsel all documents in certain files other than, inter alia, respondent’s "private papers”; and order of the same court and Justice entered on or about September 30, 1996, which denied petitioners’ motion to compel respondent to comply with the prior order and for sanctions, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court properly rejected petitioners’ request that respondent turn over the remaining files maintained with respect to certain concluded business financing and restructuring matters, which documents include drafts, internal memoranda, mark-ups, research, and other "papers reflecting the opinions, reflections and thought processes”, since petitioners failed to demonstrate the need therefor and, further, the court properly deemed the documents private property (see, Zackiva Communications Corp. v Milberg Weiss Bershad Specthrie & Lerach, 223 AD2d 417, Iv denied 88 NY2d 802).

We have considered petitioners’ remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger and Tom, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered on or about June 5, 1996, which directed respondent to turn over to petitioners’ counsel all documents in certain files other than, inter alia, respondent’s "private papers”; and order of the same court and Justice entered on or about September 30, 1996, which denied petitioners’ motion to compel respondent to comply with the prior order and for sanctions, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court properly rejected petitioners’ request that respondent turn over the remaining files maintained with respect to certain concluded business financing and restructuring matters, which documents include drafts, internal memoranda, mark-ups, research, and other "papers reflecting the opinions, reflections and thought processes”, since petitioners failed to demonstrate the need therefor and, further, the court properly deemed the documents private property (see, Zackiva Communications Corp. v Milberg Weiss Bershad Specthrie & Lerach, 223 AD2d 417, Iv denied 88 NY2d 802).

We have considered petitioners’ remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

235 A.D.2d 355, 653 N.Y.S.2d 12, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 630, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sage-realty-corp-v-proskatjer-rose-goetz-mendelsohn-l-l-p-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack