From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Financial Structures Ltd. v. UBS AG

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jun 5, 2012
96 A.D.3d 433 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Opinion

2012-06-5

FINANCIAL STRUCTURES LIMITED, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. UBS AG, et al., Defendants–Respondents.

SNR Denton US LLP, New York (Richard M. Zuckerman of counsel), for appellants. Paul Hastings LLP, New York (James B. Worthington of counsel), for respondents.


SNR Denton US LLP, New York (Richard M. Zuckerman of counsel), for appellants. Paul Hastings LLP, New York (James B. Worthington of counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara R. Kapnick, J.), entered February 17, 2012, which granted defendants' motion to quash a subpoena served by plaintiffs on a nonparty seeking transcripts of depositiontestimony of certain witnesses and related documents in a separate action brought against defendants, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court providently exercised its discretion in granting the motion, as plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the information sought could not be obtained in the course of their own depositions of witnesses common to both actions ( see Menkes v. Beth Abraham Servs., 89 A.D.3d 647, 647–648, 933 N.Y.S.2d 548 [2011];Connolly v. Napoli, Kaiser & Bern, LLP, 81 A.D.3d 530, 531, 917 N.Y.S.2d 175 [2011] ).

MAZZARELLI, J.P., SWEENY, DeGRASSE, FREEDMAN, RICHTER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Financial Structures Ltd. v. UBS AG

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jun 5, 2012
96 A.D.3d 433 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
Case details for

Financial Structures Ltd. v. UBS AG

Case Details

Full title:FINANCIAL STRUCTURES LIMITED, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. UBS AG, et…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Jun 5, 2012

Citations

96 A.D.3d 433 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 4302
944 N.Y.S.2d 884

Citing Cases

Schorr v. Schorr

The court providently exercised its discretion in granting the motion to quash the subpoenas. Defendant…

GS Plasticos Limitada v. Bureau Veritas Consumer Prods. Servs., Inc.

As a preliminary matter, the court finds that BVCPS has standing to challenge the Subpoena, since it is a…