Case Name: David P. Lennon et al., Appellants, v. Andrew M. Cuomo, as Attorney General of the State of New York, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2012-02-02
Citations: 92 A.D.3d 411
Docket Number: 
Parties: David P. Lennon et al., Appellants, v Andrew M. Cuomo, as Attorney General of the State of New York, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 92
Pages: 411–412

Head Matter:
David P. Lennon et al., Appellants, v Andrew M. Cuomo, as Attorney General of the State of New York, Respondent.
[937 NYS2d 588]

Opinion:
Respondent's issuance of subpoenas in connection with an investigation into complaints from consumers and publishers alleging fraudulent and deceptive practices in petitioner magazine subscription agents' issuance of notices for the renewal of magazine subscriptions was within his broad authority (see Executive Law § 63 [12]; General Business Law § 349; Matter of American Dental Coop, v Attorney-General of State of N.Y., 127 AD2d 274, 280 [1987]). The information sought "bears a reasonable relationship to the subject matter under investigation and the public interest to be served" (American Dental Coop., 127 AD2d at 280). Concur — Gonzalez, PJ., Saxe, Moskowitz, Acosta and Freedman, JJ.