Share this:

A New York Appellate Court upheld the City of New York Department of Investigation’s authority to subpoena private citizens during an investigation regarding a public hearing before the City Landmarks Commission.  During a hearing, it was alleged that a member of a community group read a letter from the Borough President into the record, but that she changed its contents.  She read the letter to state that the Borough President wanted the Landmarks Commission to designate a certain property, when in reality the letter merely asked the Landmarks Commission to hold a public hearing as to a designation.  It was further alleged that a second community advocate signed in as representing a member of the Assembly and that she similarly read a letter that stated the member supported the designation when it only requested a public hearing.  Following the Landmarks hearing, both the Borough President and the Assembly Member complained to the Landmarks Commission who then forwarded the matter to the Department of Investigation.

                    

One of the community advocates refused to comply with the Department’s subpoena, arguing that the Department could not subpoena private citizens and that it violated her right to free speech.  The Court concluded that the subpoena did not constitute a chilling of free speech, and that even if it was aimed at the content of her testimony, it was permissible since the Department is charged with ensuring that the practices of City agencies are legitimate and that there was no abuse.  The Department therefore had a right to issue the subpoena.

 

Parkhouse v. Stringer, 55 A.D.3d 1, 863 N.Y.S.2d 400 (1^st Dept. 8/19/2008).

 

The opinion may be accessed at: http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2008/2008_06625.htm

 

For interesting background reading, see the Landmark West! Blog at: http://landmarkwest.blogspot.com/2008/04/parkhouse-v-stringer-real-story.html