midpage

Mendelovitz v. CohenMendelovitz v. Cohen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Mar 11, 2008
Versions:49 A.D.3d 612
852 N.Y.S.2d 795
852 N.Y.2d 795

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in, inter alia, quashing the subpoenas served upon the nonparties Regal Home Collections, Inc., Mayer Rispler, Nat Safern, and Harri Shan, as the discovery sought is not material and necessary to the prosecution of the action (see White Bay Enters. v Newsday, Inc., 288 AD2d 211 [2001]; see also Riverside Capital Advisors, Inc. v First Secured Capital Corp., 28 AD3d 457, 459-460 [2006]; Golden Mark Maintenance v Alarcon, 265 AD2d 377 [1999]). Mastro, J.P., Fisher, Florio, Angiolillo and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Mendelovitz v. Cohen
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Mar 11, 2008
Citations: 49 A.D.3d 612; 852 N.Y.S.2d 795; 852 N.Y.2d 795
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
Log In