NYCL AGO 2002-20.
Case Date | December 10, 2002 |
Court | New York |
New York Attorney General Opinions
2002.
AGO 2002-20.
December 10,
2002Informal Opinion
No. 2002-20Lorna
Goodman, Esq.County AttorneyCounty of
NassauOffice of the County AttorneyRalph G. Caso
Executiveand Legislative Building One West
StreetMineola, New York 11501-4820C.P.L.R. § 2219; CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW § 610.10; DOMESTIC
RELATIONS LAW § 235; JUDICIARY LAW § 90(10); 22 N.Y.C.R.R. §
691.5.A subpoena issued
by the Grievance Committee and signed by the Clerk of the Appellate Division
does not supplant the requirement of a court order set forth in Domestic
Relations Law section 235.Dear Ms. Goodman:
This is in response to your inquiry as to whether Domestic
Relations Law ("DRL") § 235 requires a court order prior to releasing documents
in a matrimonial action to a Grievance Committee. Specifically, you state in
your letter that the Office of the Nassau County Clerk of the Court(fn1) was
served with a subpoena for a matrimonial file from the Grievance Committee of
the Appellate Division, Second Department. The Nassau County Clerk's office
denied this request due to the apparent constraints of DRL § 235(1), which
requires a court order when releasing such files to a non-party. Upon this
denial, you were informed by the Grievance Committee that a court order was not
necessary, and that a subpoena signed by the Clerk of the Appellate Division
would suffice to permit release of the file. You indicated that the Grievance
Committee did not cite any statutory authority in support of its position. You
seek an opinion as to whether a subpoena signed by the Clerk of the Appellate
Division suffices to supplant the requirement of a court order for release of a
matrimonial file pursuant to DRL § 235(1).
We conclude that a subpoena issued by the Grievance Committee and
signed by the Clerk of the Appellate Division does not supplant the requirement
of a court order set forth in DRL § 235(1). The statute has been narrowly
construed to implement its policy of protecting the confidentiality of
matrimonial records and it does not expressly exempt the Grievance Committee
from the requirement for a court order. Therefore, we find that the Grievance
Committee, like any other non-party, should seek a court order to obtain access
to the matrimonial file.(fn2)
Domestic Relations Law § 235(1) provides:
An officer of the court with whom the proceedings in a matrimonial action or a written agreement of separation or an action or proceeding for custody, visitation or maintenance of a child are filed, or before whom the testimony is taken, or his clerk, either before or after the termination of the suit, shall not permit a copy of any of the pleadings, affidavits, findings of fact, conclusions of law, judgment of...
To continue reading
Request your trial