Opinion
8305–8306–8307N Index 100516/14
01-31-2019
STATE of New York, City of New York, etc., ex rel. Leonard M. Campagna, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. POST INTEGRATIONS, INC., et al., Defendants–Appellants.
Hodgson Russ LLP, Buffalo (Aaron M. Saykin of counsel), for appellants. Law Offices of Joshua Parkhurst, New York (Joshua Parkhurst of counsel), for respondent.
Hodgson Russ LLP, Buffalo (Aaron M. Saykin of counsel), for appellants.
Law Offices of Joshua Parkhurst, New York (Joshua Parkhurst of counsel), for respondent.
Renwick, J.P., Gische, Kapnick, Gesmer, Moulton, JJ.
The trial court's discovery determinations, unattended by error of law or abuse of discretion, should not be disturbed on appeal ( Forman v. Henkin, 30 N.Y.3d 656, 662, 70 N.Y.S.3d 157, 93 N.E.3d 882 [2018] ).
Discovery concerning the alter ego/veil piercing allegations is appropriate at this stage (see First Bank of Ams. v. Motor Car Funding, 257 A.D.2d 287, 293–294, 690 N.Y.S.2d 17 [1st Dept. 1999] ).
Plaintiff established his entitlement to defendant Post Integrations' federal tax returns, which allegedly contain some of the misrepresentations at issue (see Gama Aviation Inc. v. Sandton Capital Partners, LP, 113 A.D.3d 456, 457, 978 N.Y.S.2d 185 [1st Dept. 2014] ; Nanbar Realty Corp. v. Pater Realty Co., 242 A.D.2d 208, 209–210, 661 N.Y.S.2d 216 [1st Dept. 1997] ).
Defendants' financial statements are central to the claims under New York's False Claims Act (Finance Law § 189[1] ). Their argument that documents lacking a clear New York nexus are irrelevant misses the point of the allegations that defendants intentionally sought to avoid the payment of New York franchise and corporate taxes.