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: Camille ROSSI, petitioner-respondent, v. Leonard N. SPANO, etc., respondent, Robert Rossi, appellant.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR 5239, inter alia, to determine the rights of Camille Rossi and Robert Rossi to money held by the Westchester County Clerk or Commissioner of Finance, Robert Rossi appeals, as limited by his brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Tolbert, J.), dated July 18, 2003, which, inter alia, granted that branch of his motion which was for discovery of certain documents only to the extent of directing the petitioner to produce documents for the period of time from April 14, 1992, through December 13, 1995.
ORDERED that the order is modified by deleting therefrom the date “April 14, 1992,” and substituting therefor the date “January 10, 1991”; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The Supreme Court erred in limiting discovery by directing the petitioner to produce books and records pertaining to certain real property only for the period of time from April 14, 1992, through December 13, 1995. The relevant documents regarding the property would be those generated from January 10, 1991, when the court first ordered the petitioner to place income from the property in an escrow account, through December 13, 1995, when the court appointed a receiver to arrange the sale of the property. The appellant demonstrated that the documents generated during this time frame are material and necessary to establish his right to the money at issue (see CPLR 3101; Allen v. Crowell-Collier Pub. Co., 21 N.Y.2d 403, 406, 288 N.Y.S.2d 449, 235 N.E.2d 430; Cilone v. Willson Safety Prods., 229 A.D.2d 372, 373, 644 N.Y.S.2d 562; Barrow v. Lawrence United Corp., 155 A.D.2d 806, 807, 548 N.Y.S.2d 82).
The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.
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: February 07, 2005
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)