From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Children's Village v. Greenburgh Eleven

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 7, 1996
232 A.D.2d 356 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

October 7, 1996.

In an action for a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief, the defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), entered September 21, 1995, as granted the plaintiffs' motion to compel the defendant John Goetschius and other officers and/or members of the defendant Greenburgh Eleven Teachers' Union Federation of Teachers, Local 1532 to answer certain deposition questions.

Before: Miller, J. P., Ritter, Goldstein and Florio, JJ.


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the appellants' contention, the Supreme Court was not required to defer jurisdiction to the Public Employment Relations Board on the issue of whether members of the Greenburgh Eleven Teachers' Union Federation of Teachers, Local 1532 were required to answer questions during depositions in this pending action, as agency expertise was not required ( see, Engelhardt v Consolidated Rail Corp., 756 F2d 1368, 1369; Staatsburg Water Co. v Staatsburg Fire Dist., 72 NY2d 147, 156; People v Port Distrib. Corp., 114 AD2d 259).

The Supreme Court properly determined that permitting the questioning at issue would not interfere with the rights of union members to organize and to consult with union officials on matters affecting them as employees ( compare, Matter of City of Newburgh v Newman, 70 AD2d 362, 365-366; Matter of Seelig v Shepard, 152 Misc 2d 699, 702)


Summaries of

Children's Village v. Greenburgh Eleven

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 7, 1996
232 A.D.2d 356 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Children's Village v. Greenburgh Eleven

Case Details

Full title:CHILDREN'S VILLAGE et al., Respondents, v. GREENBURGH ELEVEN TEACHERS…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 7, 1996

Citations

232 A.D.2d 356 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
648 N.Y.S.2d 152

Citing Cases

State v. David A. Brogno, M.D., Alfred Becker, M.D., Albert H. Zucker, M.D., Richard L. Roth, M.D. Seymour H. Lutwak, M.D., Hudson Heart Assocs., PC

Though not codified by statute, courts have recognized as privileged certain communications intended as…

State v. Brogno

Though not codified by statute, courts have recognized as privileged certain communications intended as…