Legal Opinion

New Hampshire Insurance v. Varda, Inc.

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

Decided May 4, 1999PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Huff, J.), entered July 23,1998, which denied plaintiffs motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum served upon a nonparty, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs motion to quash was properly denied, since the information sought by defendants’ subpoena duces tecum was not “ ‘utterly irrelevant to any proper inquiry* ” (Ayubo v Eastman Kodak Co., 158 AD2d 641, 642; Pagan v City of New York, 180 AD2d 545). We have considered plaintiffs additional arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J. P., Wallach, Lerner and Rubin, JJ.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Ayubo v. Eastman Kodak Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  2. Pagan v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Velez v. Hunts Point Multi-Service Center, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  2. Dominicci v. FordAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  3. DOMINICCI, LIMARIE v. FORD, THOMASAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  4. Dominicci v. FordAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  5. In re the Estate of LiGreciNew York Surrogate's Court · 2016