Brady v. Ottaway Newspapers, Inc.
| Decision Date | 20 November 1984 |
| Citation | 473 N.E.2d 1172,484 N.Y.S.2d 798,63 N.Y.2d 1031 |
| Parties | , 473 N.E.2d 1172, 11 Media L. Rep. 1149 John E. BRADY, Jr., et al., Appellants, v. OTTAWAY NEWSPAPERS, INC., et al., Appellants. New York State Division of State Police, Nonparty-Respondent. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division, 97 A.D.2d 451, 467 N.Y.S.2d 417, should be affirmed, with costs.
In this action for damages for libel, plaintiffs and defendants both sought under CPLR 3101 (subd. par. 4) and CPLR 3120 (subd. ) disclosure of confidential investigative reports of the nonparty respondent concerning police scandals which occurred in 1972. Respondent opposed disclosure on the basis of the "public interest" privilege (see Cirale v. 80 Pine St. Corp., 35 N.Y.2d 113, 359 N.Y.S.2d 1, 316 N.E.2d 301), claiming that release of the reports would trigger reprisals against confidential informants and impair its ability to conduct future investigations. Special Term granted the motions but ordered redaction of the names of informants. The Appellate Division reversed, on the law, holding that Special Term had abused its discretion in ordering disclosure.
Whether or not adequate special circumstances have been shown to support discovery against a nonparty is generally a determination to be made upon a review of the facts, and rests within the sound discretion of the court to which application is made (see Matter of U.S. Pioneer Electronics Corp. 47 N.Y.2d 914, 916, 419 N.Y.S.2d 484, 393 N.E.2d 478). The intermediate appellate court, here the Appellate Division, may review a determination for abuse of discretion; moreover, since it is vested with the same power and discretion as Special Term, the Appellate Division may also substitute its own discretion even in the absence of abuse (see Matter of Attorney-General of State of N.Y. v. Katz, 55 N.Y.2d 1015, 449 N.Y.S.2d 476, 434 N.E.2d 712), which is then reviewable by us only for abuse of discretion as a matter of law.
We conclude that the Appellate Division here substituted its own discretion for that of Special Term (see Matter of Von Bulow, 63 N.Y.2d 221, 481 N.Y.S.2d 67, 470 N.E.2d 866). Recognizing, as did Special Term, that the right of a litigant to obtain evidence must at times give way to the public interest in facilitating investigations, the Appellate Division found that "speculation, fueled by disclosure of the reports, could subject sources to reprisals and imperil any future investigation of a similar nature." (Brady v. Ottaway Newspapers, 97 A.D.2d 451, 452, 467 N.Y.S.2d 417.) This finding reflects that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cioffi v. S.M. Foods, Inc.
...N.Y.S.3d 653 ; see Andon v. 302–304 Mott St. Assoc., 94 N.Y.2d 740, 745, 709 N.Y.S.2d 873, 731 N.E.2d 589 ; Brady v. Ottaway Newspapers, 63 N.Y.2d 1031, 1032, 484 N.Y.S.2d 798, 473 N.E.2d 1172 ). Turning first to that branch of the Atlanta defendants' motion which was for additional disclos......
-
Kooper v. Kooper
...discretion as a matter of law, or in the absence of abuse, has exercised its discretion improvidently ( see Brady v. Ottaway Newspapers, 63 N.Y.2d 1031, 1032, 484 N.Y.S.2d 798, 473 N.E.2d 1172; Wander v. St. John's Univ., 67 A.D.3d at 905, 888 N.Y.S.2d 412). The particular circumstances of ......
-
Green v. William Penn Life Ins. Co. of N.Y.
...for that of Supreme Court and hold that Dr. Baden should not have been permitted to testify ( see Brady v. Ottaway Newspapers, 63 N.Y.2d 1031, 484 N.Y.S.2d 798, 473 N.E.2d 1172 [1984] ). As a new trial is necessary for this reason alone, there is no need to reach the issue of whether the ve......
-
Cioffi v. S.M. Foods, Inc.
...653 ; see Andon v. 302–304 Mott St. Assoc., 94 N.Y.2d 740, 745, 709 N.Y.S.2d 873, 731 N.E.2d 589 ; Brady v. Ottaway Newpapers, Inc., 63 N.Y.2d 1031, 1032, 484 N.Y.S.2d 798, 473 N.E.2d 1172 ). Here, the Supreme Court properly granted those branches of the Atlanta defendants' motion which wer......