Warnell Carroll, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. City of New York, et al., Defendants–Appellants. (2017)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

Warnell Carroll, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. City of New York, et al., Defendants–Appellants.

5062

Decided: November 28, 2017

Tom, J.P., Friedman, Andrias, Gesmer, JJ.

Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Jonathan A. Popolow of counsel), for appellants. Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, LLP, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Larry S. Schachner, J.), entered on or about April 11, 2017, which denied defendants' motion to vacate and/or modify a prior compliance-conference order directing defendants to produce unredacted copies of documents contained in the Bronx County District Attorney's files, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion granted, and the compliance-conference order vacated.

The compliance-conference order should be vacated in this action alleging, inter alia, false arrest and malicious prosecution. “[S]ince the Bronx District Attorney, who is not a party to this action, is not under the control of the City of New York, defendants cannot be expected to produce documents prepared or maintained by any prosecutors” (Espady v. City of New York, 40 AD3d 475, 476 [1st Dept 2007] ).

CLERK

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network