From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Haenel v. November and November

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 4, 1991
172 A.D.2d 182 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

April 4, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Eugene L. Nardelli, J.).


Plaintiffs commenced this legal malpractice action individually and as trustees under the wills of Jack and Mollie Epstein based upon their holdings and the holding of Jack and Mollie Epstein of shares of stock in Allmetal Screw Products Company, Inc. They allege that as a result of defendants' malpractice, in drafting an agreement in 1977 subsequently held invalid, Morris Epstein another shareholder in charge of the corporation's operations, was enabled to engage in corporate waste, resulting in the diminution of the sale price received by plaintiffs for their shares. Plaintiffs also seek legal fees allegedly expended in their efforts to enforce the negligently drawn and invalid agreement of 1977.

Plaintiffs' tax returns have no bearing on the issue of liability or damages stemming from the decrease in value of Allmetal's stock and the expenditure of legal fees arising out of defendants' legal malpractice. Accordingly, the requests for both individual and trust tax returns and other records reflecting income and expenses are improper since defendants have not established the requisite "strong showing of necessity" to justify their disclosure (Roth v. American Colonial Ins. Co., 159 A.D.2d 370). Defendants assert that plaintiffs failed to timely move for a protective order. The general rule under such circumstances ordinarily forecloses inquiry into the propriety of such a notice (CPLR 3122, 3133). However, where the material sought is privileged under CPLR 3101 or the disclosure requests are palpably improper, as herein, this rule is not strictly observed. (See, Spancrete Northeast v. Elite Assocs., 148 A.D.2d 694, 695.)

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Ross and Asch, JJ.


Summaries of

Haenel v. November and November

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 4, 1991
172 A.D.2d 182 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Haenel v. November and November

Case Details

Full title:BEATRICE HAENEL et al., Individually and as Trustees of JACK EPSTEIN and…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Apr 4, 1991

Citations

172 A.D.2d 182 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
567 N.Y.S.2d 713

Citing Cases

Prtngle v. AC Bodyworks & Sons, LLC

As to the "payroll records" for the years 2013 and 2014, inasmuch as these records are relevant· to the case…

Nanbar Realty Corp. v. Pater Realty Co.

As a general rule, "`material and necessary'" is accorded a liberal construction (Allen v. Crowell-Collier…