VALDEZ v. Peninsula Motor Cars, Inc., et al., Appellants. (1999)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Christina VALDEZ, Respondent, v. Maurice SHARABY, Defendant, Peninsula Motor Cars, Inc., et al., Appellants.

Decided: February 01, 1999

GUY JAMES MANGANO, P.J., DANIEL W. JOY, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN and GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, JJ.

Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold, New York, N.Y. (Gary J. Levy of counsel), for appellants. Robert S. Starr, P.C., New York, N.Y., for respondent.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Peninsula Motor Cars, Inc., and Wayne Foster appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garson, J.), dated May 13, 1998, which denied their motion to quash three judicial subpoenas duces tecum.

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the appellants' motion is granted.

The purpose of a subpoena duces tecum is to compel the production of specific documents that are relevant and material to facts at issue in a pending judicial proceeding (see, Matter of Terry D., 81 N.Y.2d 1042, 601 N.Y.S.2d 452, 619 N.E.2d 389; Pernice v. Devora, 238 A.D.2d 558, 657 N.Y.S.2d 70). Here, since the subpoenas duces tecum at issue sought records simply for the purpose of gaining information to impeach the general credibility of the appellants' examining physicians, the subpoenas should have been quashed (see, Pernice v. Devora, supra).

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

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Out of date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