History
  • No items yet
midpage
Kennedy v. Curran
33 N.Y.2d 590
NY
1973
Check Treatment

Order affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: We agree with the Appellate Division that the subpoena served upon petitioner was improperly quashed by the court at Special Term. The commission’s scheduling of his examination in New York City was eminently proper. (L. 1958, ch. 989, § 2, subd. 11, par. a; see, e.g., Matter of Ryan v. Temporary State Comm. of Investigation, 12 N Y 2d 708; Matter of Ryan v. Lefkowitz, 18 N Y 2d 977.) It is only necessary to add that issuance of a subpoena does not violate the privilege against self incrimination provision of either the State or Federal Constitution and *592that any question of plaintiff’s immunity arises only upon assertion by the witness of his privilege following his attendance at the examination in response to the subpoena. (See, e.g., Matter of Boikess v. Aspland, 24 N Y 2d 136.)

Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Breitel, Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones and Wachtler.

Case Details

Case Name: Kennedy v. Curran
Court Name: New York Court of Appeals
Date Published: Jul 3, 1973
Citation: 33 N.Y.2d 590
Court Abbreviation: NY
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.