Harold Levinson Associates, Inc. v. Wong

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan M. Kenney, J.), entered April 7, 2014, which granted the motion of defendants Robin Wong and Jade Kee Wholesale LLC to quash plaintiffs third-party subpoena, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs,and the motion denied.

Defendants failed to establish that the records sought were “utterly irrelevant” to the instant action (Matter of Kapon v Koch, 23 NY3d 32, 34 [2014]), and they had sufficient notice of “the circumstances or reasons” underlying the subpoena request (CPLR 3101 [a] [4]; see Nacos v Nacos, 124 AD3d 462, 463 [1st Dept 2015]). Contrary to defendants’ contention, the motion court’s prior denial of plaintiffs motion to compel discovery as overbroad does not require granting the motion to quash, as the discovery sought in the subpoena at issue was narrower than the material previously sought. Concur — Tom, J.P., Friedman, DeGrasse, Richter and Kapnick, JJ.