From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Stevens Imports, Inc. v. Lack

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 17, 1976
52 A.D.2d 928 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Opinion

May 17, 1976


Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated November 18, 1975, which granted respondents' motion to quash four nonjudicial subpoenas, without prejudice to the issuance of new subpoenas which meet certain criteria. Order reversed, on the law, without costs, and motion denied. No fact findings were presented for review. Appellant subpoenaed the 1,000 mile service records of 924 purchasers of 1975 Toyota automobiles from the respondents, who then moved to quash those subpoenas. Special Term granted the motion, without prejudice to the issuance of new subpoenas which are to indicate the subject matter of the investigation and be limited to records of the car owners who have registered complaints against the particular dealers. The subpoenas are not defective because of a failure to specify the nature of the investigation or the relation of the documents thereto; appellant adequately set forth the purpose of the investigation in his affidavit in opposition to the motion to quash the subpoenas (see Matter of La Belle Creole Int., S.A. v Attorney-General of State of N.Y., 10 N.Y.2d 192, 196). However, it would have been preferable had the subpoenas themselves stated the purpose of the investigation. In addition, appellant's affidavit reveals that the records subpoenaed bear a reasonable relation to the subject matter under investigation and are based upon more than isolated or rare complaints by disgruntled customers (see Myerson v Lentini Bros. Moving Stor. Co., 33 N.Y.2d 250). Although the investigation was initiated by a small number of complaints, the subsequent investigation conducted by the department justified the issuance of the subpoenas. The respondents' argument that appellant lacks jurisdiction to conduct the subject investigation, since the State has pre-empted the entire field of automobile repairs, including consumer protection, with the enactment of article 12-A of the Vehicle and Traffic Law lacks merit (cf. Myerson v Lentini Bros. Moving Stor. Co., supra). Cohalan, Acting P.J., Margett, Damiani, Rabin and Shapiro, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Stevens Imports, Inc. v. Lack

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 17, 1976
52 A.D.2d 928 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)
Case details for

Matter of Stevens Imports, Inc. v. Lack

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of STEVENS IMPORTS, INC., et al., Respondents, v. JAMES J…

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

Date published: May 17, 1976

Citations

52 A.D.2d 928 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Citing Cases

Velez v. Hunts Point Ctr.

Here, on the other hand, Hunts Point, citing De Stafano, requested such relief, albeit in a footnote to its…

Paterson v. Niagara County Legislature

An investigation into the alleged mishandling of funds by the county treasurer's office is within the scope…