FUNTI v. Jewish Coalition for Religious Liberty, Manhattan Grace Tabernacle, General Conference of Seventh–Day Adventists, U.S. Assemblies of God, the Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy of the Anglican Church in North America, and the New York Metro Council for Islamic Houses of Worship, Amici Curiae. (2025)

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Douglas E. Hoffman, J.), entered on or about February 6, 2023, which denied the motion of nonparties Bishop Anba David, Fr. Gregory Saroufeem, St. Mary & St. Mark Coptic Orthodox Church, and Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate Diocese of New York and New England, to quash a judicial subpoena, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.  Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered September 11, 2023, which denied the nonparties’ motions to quash a judicial subpoena and ordered Bishop David and Father Saroufeem to testify at a hearing, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

On appeal, the nonparties concede that they complied with the subpoenas by producing the subpoenaed documents and testifying at the subsequent hearing.  Furthermore, because the nonparties have produced the documents and the hearing has concluded, the judicial subpoenas have no further force and effect, and the nonparties’ rights are no longer affected by resolution of the appeal (see Matter of Victor v. New York City Off. of Trials and Hearings, 174 A.D.3d 455, 102 N.Y.S.3d 431 [1st Dept. 2019];  Matter of Abidi v. Antohi, 58 A.D.3d 726, 726, 873 N.Y.S.2d 638 [2d Dept. 2009]).  Accordingly, the appeals from both orders have been rendered moot and dismissal of the appeals is appropriate (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 714, 431 N.Y.S.2d 400, 409 N.E.2d 876 [1980];  Berger v. Prospect Park Residence, LLC, 166 A.D.3d 937, 938, 87 N.Y.S.3d 572 [2d Dept. 2018], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 910, 2019 WL 2622555 [2019]).

Under the particular circumstances of this case, this issue does not warrant invocation of the exception to the mootness doctrine (see Matter of Hearst Corp., 50 N.Y.2d at 714–715, 431 N.Y.S.2d 400, 409 N.E.2d 876).  We note that the use made of this evidence in the matrimonial action remains subject to judicial review.

Motion to file an amicus curiae brief, granted.