Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: an APPLICATION TO QUASH A GRAND JURY SUBPOENA. New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, Appellant; People of the State of New York, Respondent.
In a Grand Jury proceeding to inquire into the death of Ira Medjuck, New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hall, J.), entered March 28, 1996, which denied its application pursuant to CPLR 2304 to quash a Grand Jury subpoena duces tecum.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the application to quash the Grand Jury subpoena duces tecum is granted.
Although the Grand Jury's power to subpoena records as an exercise of its investigative powers is extensive, it is not unlimited (see, Matter of Stern v. Morgenthau, 62 N.Y.2d 331, 336, 476 N.Y.S.2d 810, 465 N.E.2d 349). The Grand Jury may not violate a valid privilege, whether derived from the Constitution, a statute, or the common law (see, Matter of Stern v. Morgenthau, supra). Here, the District Attorney issued a subpoena demanding production of Coney Island Hospital's quality assurance records. Public Health Law § 2805-m(1) provides that these records shall be kept confidential and shall not be released except to the Department of Health or another hospital considering granting privileges to a physician. This provision does not except from confidentiality the release of quality assurance records to the Grand Jury. Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the application to quash the Grand Jury subpoena duces tecum.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: May 12, 1997
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)