Legal Opinion

Smith v. City of New York

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

Decided March 18, 2008PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The quashing of the subpoena was a proper exercise of judicial discretion (see Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406 [1968]). Plaintiff failed to establish that the ADA’s deposition testimony as to her motives for charging plaintiff with possession of a forged instrument in an underlying criminal action, and instructing the grand jury in the way she did, is “material and necessary” to this malicious prosecution action against the City (CPLR 3101 [a]; see generally Blittner v Berg & Dorf, 138 AD2d 439 [1988]). Such an action based on the allegedly malicious or improper acts of an…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Allen v. Crowell-Collier Publishing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1968
  2. Johnson v. Town of ColonieAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  3. Blittner v. BergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
  4. Drakeford v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. O'CONNELL v. CowanKentucky Supreme Court · 2010
  2. O'CONNELL v. CowanKentucky Supreme Court · 2010

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API