Williams v. Oppenheimer & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Williams v. Oppenheimer & Co.

35 A.D.3d 491, 824 N.Y.S.2d 716

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

DecidedDecember 5, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 35 A.D.3d 491 (Williams v. Oppenheimer & Co.) 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

Williams v. Oppenheimer & Co., 35 A.D.3d 491, 824 N.Y.S.2d 716 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to quash a subpoena duces tecum served by the respondent upon an out-of-state nonparty witness in an arbitration proceeding before the National Association of Securities Dealers and for the imposition of a sanction upon the respondent, the petitioners appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Dunne, J.), dated November 21, 2005, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as denied that branch of the petition which was to quash the subpoena is dismissed as academic, as the arbitration proceeding has been concluded; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and is it further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondent.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in not imposing a sanction against the respondent under 22 NYCRR130-1.1 (c). Prudenti, EJ., Schmidt, Dillon and Covello, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to quash a subpoena duces tecum served by the respondent upon an out-of-state nonparty witness in an arbitration proceeding before the National Association of Securities Dealers and for the imposition of a sanction upon the respondent, the petitioners appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Dunne, J.), dated November 21, 2005, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as denied that branch of the petition which was to quash the subpoena is dismissed as academic, as the arbitration proceeding has been concluded; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and is it further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondent.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in not imposing a sanction against the respondent under 22 NYCRR130-1.1 (c). Prudenti, EJ., Schmidt, Dillon and Covello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 A.D.3d 491, 824 N.Y.S.2d 716, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-oppenheimer-co-nyappdiv-2006.