From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Richburg v. Morgenthau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 16, 1992
184 A.D.2d 316 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

June 16, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (George F. Roberts, J.).


In connection with a civil suit pending in Federal court, petitioners moved for release of the minutes of a Grand Jury investigation into the death of their son. In order to warrant such disclosure, it is well settled that the seeking party must demonstrate a compelling and particularized need therefor strong enough to overcome the presumption of confidentiality cloaking Grand Jury proceedings (Matter of District Attorney of Suffolk County, 58 N.Y.2d 436, 444). Petitioners' application was properly denied, and the cross motion properly granted, since the bare claim that Grand Jury minutes are needed to prepare for trial or would be useful in impeaching witnesses on cross-examination is insufficient to establish compelling need of proof that is dispositive and precludes an exercise of discretion by the court in favor of disclosure of the minutes (see, Melendez v. City of New York, 109 A.D.2d 13, 19-20).

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ellerin, Wallach, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

Richburg v. Morgenthau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 16, 1992
184 A.D.2d 316 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Richburg v. Morgenthau

Case Details

Full title:FRANCES RICHBURG, as Administratrix of the Estate of MICHAEL RICHBURG…

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

Date published: Jun 16, 1992

Citations

184 A.D.2d 316 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Citing Cases

Yushavayev v. City of New York

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs' motion to direct the nonparty, the Queens County District…

People v. Badia

The court properly found that appellant failed to rebut the presumption of confidentiality of grand jury…