People v. Abraham Operations Assoc. LLC
2024 NY Slip Op 32948(U)
N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.2024Background
- The New York Attorney General brought a special proceeding under Executive Law § 63(12) against Abraham Operations Associates LLC and related parties, alleging repeated fraud and illegality in operating nursing homes.
- The case is in the Supreme Court, New York County, before Justice Melissa A. Crane.
- Defendants moved under CPLR 408 for leave to conduct discovery, requiring court approval because the case is a special proceeding.
- The Attorney General has already disclosed the evidence it intends to rely on at the outset of the case, as required by the statute.
- Defendants sought discovery of various categories of documents and information related to the AG’s investigation, including witness identities, statements, medical records, and financial documents.
- The court denied each request, finding that defendants failed to show "ample need" for the requested discovery and that much of the information sought was either work product, irrelevant, or accessible through other means.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entitlement to names/statements of AG's witnesses | Names/statements are work product, not discoverable | Entitled to underlying witness info for defense | Denied—work product; no ample need |
| Access to AG investigative materials | Only relevant, non-privileged material should be disclosed | Need broader discovery to rebut AG's case | Denied—not relevant, no ample need |
| Discovery of medical/operational records | Defendants already have required patient and operation records | Need AG-collected records to defend against allegations | Denied—records in defendants’ possession |
| Discovery of financial documentation (rents/funds) | AG has disclosed all on which it relies for affirmative case | Need access to AG’s underlying financial evidence | Denied—public/accessible or not in AG’s possession |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Apple Health & Sports Clubs, Ltd., Inc., 206 A.D.2d 266 (1st Dep’t 1994) (explains Executive Law § 63(12) is designed for expeditious Attorney General relief in business fraud cases)
- People v. Northern Leasing Sys. Inc., 193 A.D.3d 67 (1st Dep’t 2021) (sets 'ample need' standard for discovery in special proceedings)
- People v. Volkswagen of Am., 41 A.D.2d 827 (1st Dep’t 1973) (witness names/statements from AG investigation are protected as work product)
- People v. Bestline Prod., Inc., 41 N.Y.2d 887 (1977) (limiting disclosure of witness identities when practice under attack is sufficiently described)