Opinion
NO. 422781-2023
04-11-2024
In the MATTER OF GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION
Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Caroline S. Williamson of counsel), for respondent.
Argirios J. Nickas, New York, for non-party appellant Under 21, doing business as Covenant House New York.
Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Caroline S. Williamson of counsel), for respondent.
Renwick, P J., Webber, Kennedy, Pitt–Burke, Michael, JJ.
Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Althea E.M. Drysdale, J.), entered October 25, 2023, which denied the motion of nonparty appellant Under 21 d/b/a Covenant House New York to quash subpoenas duces tecum served by the People of the State of New York upon appellant, and ordered it to disclose the requested interior surveillance video and the requested incident reports to the People, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable order.
This Court is constrained by the Court of Appeals holding in Matter of People v. Juarez, 31 N.Y.3d 1186, 82 N.Y.S.3d 336, 107 N.E.3d 556 (2018). Therefore, while appellant may seek other remedies at law to prohibit the subpoenas’ enforcement (see Juarez, 31 N.Y.3d at 1191 n. 5, 82 N.Y.S.3d 336, 107 N.E.3d 556; Matter of Newsday, Inc., 3 N.Y.3d 651, 652, 782 N.Y.S.2d 689, 816 N.E.2d 561 [2004]; see also Matter of Canning v. Revoir, 220 A.D.3d 16, 196 N.Y.S.3d 810 [3d Dept. 2023]), the order determining the motion to quash subpoenas is nonappealable because the order was issued after the filing of a related indictment (Juarez, 31 N.Y.3d at 1188–1189, 82 N.Y.S.3d 336, 107 N.E.3d 556).