Legal Opinion
Virag v. Hynes
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 17, 1981PublishedCited by 82 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Jasen, J.
The question presented by this appeal is whether, in response to a motion to quash a Grand Jury subpoena duces tecum on relevancy grounds, a prosecutor is obligated to come forth with a factual demonstration that the items sought by the subpoena have some relation to the subject matter of the Grand Jury’s investigation.
On July 10, 1980, petitioners were served with separate subpoenas duces tecum requiring them to appear before a Nassau County Grand Jury and produce certain books, records and documents pertaining to the Echo Adult Home of Laurel Hollow, New York.…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- United States v. DionisioSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Blair v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Wood v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- United States v. MaraSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Matter of Edge Ho Holding Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by82 opinions
- Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. AbramsNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- In re Grand Jury Subpoenas for Local 17, 135, 257 & 608 of United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- Trump v. VanceSupreme Court of the United States · 2020
- Levin v. MurawskiNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- American Dental Cooperative, Inc. v. Attorney-GeneralAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
77 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.