Court Opinion

ID: 5521004
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-10 17:44:14.934831+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:34:24.566403
License: Public Domain

Order affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: The paper delivered by respondent to appellant was not a subpoena duces tecum such as is described in subdivision 2 of section 73 of the General Business Law but a mere request issued pursuant to subdivision 1 of that section. Such a request is not subject to a motion to vacate, quash or modify. The propriety of a licensee’s failure to produce records so requested is reviewable only if and after action is taken by respondent affecting the license (General Business Law, § 79; cf. Matter of Union Ins. Agency v. Holz, 1 A D 2d 945, app. dsmd. and mot. for lv. to app. den. 1 N Y 2d 644, 921, app. dsmd. 353 U. S. 932).
Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Bubke, Foster and Scileppi. Judge Van Voobhis dissents and votes to reverse in the following opinion.