Spadaro v. Balesteri

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Spadaro v. Balesteri

237 A.D.2d 507, 656 N.Y.S.2d 908, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2837

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 24, 1997·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Salvatore Balesteri appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated March 28, 1996, as granted the plaintiffs’ motion pursuant to Civil Rights Law § 50-a and directed the production of recorded statements made by him during the course of an internal investigation conducted by the defendant City of New York Police Department.

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

The plaintiffs submitted a supplemental record which contained a transcript of the recorded statements made by the defendant during the Police Department’s internal investigation. The transcript was reviewed by this Court in camera. We find that the Supreme Court properly directed the production of the recorded statements at issue, as these statements were relevant and material to the action before it (see, Civil Rights Law § 50-a [2], [3]; People v Gissendanner, 48 NY2d 543; Becker v City of New York, 162 AD2d 488; Lawrence v City of New York, 118 AD2d 758).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Santucci, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Salvatore Balesteri appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated March 28, 1996, as granted the plaintiffs’ motion pursuant to Civil Rights Law § 50-a and directed the production of recorded statements made by him during the course of an internal investigation conducted by the defendant City of New York Police Department.

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

The plaintiffs submitted a supplemental record which contained a transcript of the recorded statements made by the defendant during the Police Department’s internal investigation. The transcript was reviewed by this Court in camera. We find that the Supreme Court properly directed the production of the recorded statements at issue, as these statements were relevant and material to the action before it (see, Civil Rights Law § 50-a [2], [3]; People v Gissendanner, 48 NY2d 543; Becker v City of New York, 162 AD2d 488; Lawrence v City of New York, 118 AD2d 758).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Santucci, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Spadaro v. Balesteri, 237 A.D.2d 507, 656 N.Y.S.2d 908, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2837 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

237 A.D.2d 507 (Spadaro v. Balesteri) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related