39 N.Y.2d 314, Cunningham v. Nadjari

Citation39 N.Y.2d 314, 383 N.Y.S.2d 590
Party NameCunningham v. Nadjari
Case DateApril 01, 1976
CourtUnited States Court of Appeals (New York)

Page 314

39 N.Y.2d 314

383 N.Y.S.2d 590

In the Matter of Patrick J. CUNNINGHAM, Appellant,

v.

Maurice H. NADJARI, as Deputy Attorney-General of the State of New York, Respondent. In the Matter of Jerry L. CRISPINO, Appellant,

v.

Maurice H. NADJARI, as Deputy Attorney-General of the State of New York, Respondent. In the Matter of Gerald V. ESPOSITO, Appellant,

v.

Maurice H. NADJARI, as Deputy Attorney-General of the State of New York, Respondent. In the Matter of Paul VICTOR, Appellant,

v.

Maurice H. NADJARI, as Deputy Attorney-General of the State of New York, Respondent.

New York Court of Appeals

April 1, 1976.

Gregory J. Perrin, New York City, for Patrick J. cunningham.

Hal Meyerson, New York City, for Jerry L. Crispino.

Max Wild, New York City, for Gerald V. Esposito.

Charles Haydon, New York City, for Paul Victor.

Maurice H. Nadjari, Deputy Atty. Gen., Special State Prosecutor, pro se (Bennett L. Gershman, Allen G. Swan and Walter F. Bottger, New York City, of counsel), for Maurice H. Nadjari, respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Order of the Appellate Division affirmed, without costs.

[383 N.Y.S.2d 591] Preliminary objection to the direct appealability of the orders is raised by respondents. It is true that the direct appealability of orders granting or denying motions to quash subpoenas in criminal investigations and actions has a peculiar analytical basis. However, since 1936 in a series of cases beginning with People v. Doe, 272 N.Y. 473, 3 N.E.2d 875, affg., 247 A.D. 324, 286 N.Y.S. 343, this court has allowed the direct appealability of orders in such proceedings. It was reasoned that they were final orders in special proceedings on the civil side of a court vested with civil jurisdiction. The court did so as recently as in Matter of Boikess v. Aspland, 24 N.Y.2d 136, 138--139, 299 N.Y.S.2d 163, 164--165, 247 N.E.2d 135, 136--137; see Matter of Santangello v. People, 38 N.Y.2d 536, 539, 381 N.Y.S.2d 472, 473, 344 N.E.2d 404, 405, discussing the rule as extant. Since the jurisdiction of an Extraordinary Term is coextensive with that of an ordinary term of Supreme Court possessing both criminal and civil jurisdiction, the same rule obtains in the instant case (see Matter of Reynolds v. Cropsey, 241 N.Y. 389, 395--396, 150 N.E. 303, 305; Executive Order No. 56, 9 NYCRR 1.56). Consequently, on a basis of Stare decisis these...

To continue reading

Request your trial
52 practice notes
  • 576 P.2d 572 (Idaho 1978), 12294, State v. Ramsey
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court of Idaho
    • March 6, 1978
    ...against self-incrimination does not embrace a privilege against being required to claim that privilege. See, Cunningham v. Nadjari, 39 N.Y.2d 314, 383 N.Y.S.2d 590, 347 N.E.2d 915 (1976). Assuming that the witness had asserted her Fifth Amendment rights, defense counsel argues on appeal tha......
  • 116 Misc.2d 1069, People v. Slochowsky
    • United States
    • December 9, 1982
    ...is a "special proceeding on the civil side of a court vested with civil jurisdiction" (Matter of Cunningham v. Nadjari, 39 N.Y.2d 314, 317, 383 N.Y.S.2d 590, 347 N.E.2d 915). Initially this court must determine whether relevancy and privilege are proper issues raised on a motion t......
  • 50 N.Y.2d 14, Additional January 1979 Grand Jury of Albany Supreme Court v. Doe
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • April 1, 1980
    ...in the public eye in terms of whether the inquiry results in the filing of criminal charges (cf. Matter of Cunningham v. Nadjari, 39 N.Y.2d 314, 318, 383 N.Y.S.2d 590, 347 N.E.2d 915; People v. Mackell, 47 A.D.2d 209, 366 N.Y.S.2d 173, affd. 40 N.Y.2d 59, 386 N.Y.S.2d 37, 351 N.E.2d 684), h......
  • 82 N.Y.2d 521, Codey on Behalf of State of N.J. v. Capital Cities, American Broadcasting Corp., Inc.
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • November 22, 1993
    ...in nature (see, Matter of Abrams [John Anonymous], 62 N.Y.2d 183, 192, 476 N.Y.S.2d 494, 465 N.E.2d 1; Matter of Cunningham v. Nadjari, 39 N.Y.2d 314, 317, 383 N.Y.S.2d 590, 347 N.E.2d 915; Matter of Boikess v. Aspland, 24 N.Y.2d 136, 299 N.Y.S.2d 163, 247 N.E.2d 135). Furthermore, under th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
51 cases
  • 576 P.2d 572 (Idaho 1978), 12294, State v. Ramsey
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court of Idaho
    • March 6, 1978
    ...against self-incrimination does not embrace a privilege against being required to claim that privilege. See, Cunningham v. Nadjari, 39 N.Y.2d 314, 383 N.Y.S.2d 590, 347 N.E.2d 915 (1976). Assuming that the witness had asserted her Fifth Amendment rights, defense counsel argues on appeal tha......
  • 116 Misc.2d 1069, People v. Slochowsky
    • United States
    • December 9, 1982
    ...is a "special proceeding on the civil side of a court vested with civil jurisdiction" (Matter of Cunningham v. Nadjari, 39 N.Y.2d 314, 317, 383 N.Y.S.2d 590, 347 N.E.2d 915). Initially this court must determine whether relevancy and privilege are proper issues raised on a motion t......
  • 50 N.Y.2d 14, Additional January 1979 Grand Jury of Albany Supreme Court v. Doe
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • April 1, 1980
    ...in the public eye in terms of whether the inquiry results in the filing of criminal charges (cf. Matter of Cunningham v. Nadjari, 39 N.Y.2d 314, 318, 383 N.Y.S.2d 590, 347 N.E.2d 915; People v. Mackell, 47 A.D.2d 209, 366 N.Y.S.2d 173, affd. 40 N.Y.2d 59, 386 N.Y.S.2d 37, 351 N.E.2d 684), h......
  • 82 N.Y.2d 521, Codey on Behalf of State of N.J. v. Capital Cities, American Broadcasting Corp., Inc.
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • November 22, 1993
    ...in nature (see, Matter of Abrams [John Anonymous], 62 N.Y.2d 183, 192, 476 N.Y.S.2d 494, 465 N.E.2d 1; Matter of Cunningham v. Nadjari, 39 N.Y.2d 314, 317, 383 N.Y.S.2d 590, 347 N.E.2d 915; Matter of Boikess v. Aspland, 24 N.Y.2d 136, 299 N.Y.S.2d 163, 247 N.E.2d 135). Furthermore, under th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • A Practice Commentary To Judiciary Law Article 19
    • United States
    • Cardozo Public Law, Policy and Ethics Journal Nbr. I-1, May 2003
    • May 1, 2003
    ...e.g., N.Y. Judiciary Law ßß 752, 756 (Consol. 2003). [14] Santangelo v. People, 381 N.Y.S.2d 472 (1976). [15] Cunningham v. Nadjari, 383 N.Y.S.2d 590 (1976). [16] People v. Fetcho, 91 N.Y.2d 765, 769 (1998); see also Matter of Abe A, 56 N.Y.2d 288, 293, 452 N.Y.S.2d 6, 8 (1982). [17] See Pe......