Weintraub v. Fraiman
| Decision Date | 02 July 1968 |
| Citation | 30 A.D.2d 784,291 N.Y.S.2d 438 |
| Parties | Application of Alfred WEINTRAUB, Petitioner-Respondent-Appellant, v. Arnold Guy FRAIMAN, as Commissioner of Investigation of the City of New York, Respondent-Appellant-Respondent, for an Order Vacating, Quashing and SettingAside Subpoenas issued by the Department of Investigation of the City of NewYork. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
A. S. Moser, New York City, for petitioner-respondent-appellant.
S. Buchsbaum, New York City, for respondent-appellant-respondent.
Before STEVENS, J.P., and STEUER, TILZER, McGIVERN and RABIN, JJ.
Order entered February 15, 1968, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent that the records called for by the subpoena issued by the Commissioner of Investigations shall be limited prospectively as and from April 1, 1967, and otherwise affirmed, without costs or disbursements to either party as against the other.
The right and the propriety of the Commissioner of Investigations to investigate matters pertaining to appointments made by the Mayor of the City of New York cannot be seriously questioned. New York City Charter, Section 803. Nor is there any doubt the inquisitorial powers of the Commissioner reach the office of City Marshal. See, Chambers v. City of New York, 286 N.Y. 308, 312, 36 N.E.2d 313, 314; Matter of Hirshfield v. Cook, 227 N.Y. 297, 309, 125 N.E. 504, 507; also letter dated November 21, 1963, from Presiding Justices of the Appellate Divisions, First and Second Departments, to the Mayor requesting that he instruct the Commissioner of Investigations to continue his supervision of the activities of Marshals which request was honored. And by logical extension that power reaches any person, even though unconnected with city employment, when there are grounds present to sustain a belief such person has information relative to the subject matter of the investigation. Matter of Edge Ho Holding Corp., 256 N.Y. 374, 380, 176 N.E. 537, 539. Nor are bank books beyond the reach of a proper subpoena.
However, in the matter before us, since there is no indication the petitioner had any association with the matter under scrutiny until April, 1967, it seems more appropriate to confine the effectiveness of the subpoena to a date commencing from April 1, 1967.
Order filed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
District Attorney of Kings County v. Angelo G.
...N.Y.2d 916, 918, 298 N.Y.S.2d 315, 316, 246 N.E.2d 166, cert. den., 395 U.S. 959, 89 S.Ct. 2099, 23 L.Ed.2d 745; Matter of Weintraub v. Fraiman, 30 A.D.2d 784, 291 N.Y.S.2d 438, affd., 24 N.Y.2d 918, 301 N.Y.S.2d 983, 249 N.E.2d 762; Matter of Narcotic Addiction Control Comm. v. Couloufacos......
-
Parkhouse v. Stringer
...of the city." The latter subdivision has not been read as a limitation on the witnesses DOI may subpoena. Matter of Weintraub v. Fraiman, 30 A.D.2d 784, 291 N.Y.S.2d 438 [1st Dept.1968], aff'd. 24 N.Y.2d 918, 301 N.Y.S.2d 983, 249 N.E.2d 762 [1969] holds that "inquisitorial" power "reaches ......
-
Weintraub v. Fraiman
...Court of Appeals of New York. May 14, 1969. Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 30 A.D.2d 784, 291 N.Y.S.2d 438. Moser, Henkin & Alper, New York City (Alexander S. Moser, Norman E. Henkin, New York City, of counsel), for J. Lee Rankin, New York C......
-
Ruskin v. Weintraub
...for contempt for failure to comply with a subpoena duces tecum, issued by him, as modified by this Court in Weintraub v. Fraiman, 30 A.D.2d 784, 291 N.Y.S.2d 438, affd. 24 N.Y.2d 918, 301 N.Y.S.2d 983, 249 N.E.2d 762, unanimously reversed, on the law and on the facts, without costs and with......