Legal Opinion

Brady v. Ottaway Newspapers, Inc.

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

Decided April 1, 1985PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Defendants are entitled to an in camera inspection of the requested files by Special Term as they have made a showing of facts sufficient to warrant review pursuant to Civil Rights Law § 50-a. It is reasonably likely that the requested files contain information which is material and relevant to an issue raised by the plaintiffs in their complaint — damage to their future careers. Since the confidential files may well reflect on the ability of the plaintiffs to advance their police careers, an in camera disclosure is ordered (People v Gissendanner, 48 NY2d 543; Wunsch v City of Rochester, 108…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. GissendannerNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
  2. Wunsch v. City of RochesterNew York Supreme Court · 1981

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Madsen v. United Television, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Meder v. MillerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  3. Walker v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API