Opinion
January 23, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Schoenfeld, J.).
The Referee's report was properly confirmed as its findings are supported by the record ( see, Namer v 152-54-56 W. 15th St. Realty Corp., 108 A.D.2d 705). Testimony that the information is needed to communicate with fellow members regarding respondent's amended bylaws, its alleged questionable financial practices, embezzlements, and increased administrative expenses as well as the dispute regarding residential tenants previously considered by this Court ( Matter of Jones v Division of Hous. Community Renewal, 211 A.D.2d 541, lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 806) supports petitioners' claim that access is sought in good faith and for a proper purpose (Not-For-Profit Corporation Law § 621; see, Matter of Crane Co. v Anaconda Co., 39 N.Y.2d 14, 18-20). Respondent has failed to meet its "burden to show bad faith and improper purpose" ( Matter of Curkendall v United Fedn. of Correction Officers, 107 A.D.2d 935, 936).
In view of the acrimony between the parties, we emphasize that the rent status of the buildings owned and operated by the Club has been established by prior ruling of this Court ( Matter of Jones v Division of Hous. Community Renewal, supra). Should access to respondent's books and records be utilized for any improper purpose, respondent may make application to Supreme Court for such relief as the court may, in the exercise of discretion, deem appropriate.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.