The Law Lion Logo - AI-powered legal writing assistantThe Law Lion
Home
Features
Pricing
Services
AboutBlogCasesContact
Login
Ask Law Lion AI
  1. Home
  2. >Cases
  3. >In the Matter of Felix Laporte v. Robert M. Morgenthau, as District Attorney of New York County
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

In the Matter of Felix Laporte v. Robert M. Morgenthau, as District Attorney of New York County

5 citations

Table of Contents

  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane A. Lebedeff, J.), entered on or...

Table of Contents

  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane A. Lebedeff, J.), entered on or...

No summary available for this case.

Opinions

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane A. Lebedeff, J.), entered on or about January 27, 2004, which granted the petition to the limited extent set forth in the court’s prior interim orders, directing respondent to produce redacted audiotapes, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There is a statutory exemption (Public Officers Law § 87 [2] [f]) for requests to produce record evidence that might compromise the safety of certain witnesses or law enforcement personnel, especially where the requester has demonstrated a propensity for violence and revenge (Matter of Howard v Malone, 247 AD2d 665 [1998]). The court fashioned a reasonable compromise by providing petitioner with redacted audiotape versions of the existing videotapes, consistent with both respondent’s safety concerns and petitioner’s ostensible need for audio comparison with written statements given to the police. The redaction further served legitimate safety concerns by removing witness identification from the tapes (Matter of Allen v Strojnowski, 129 AD2d 700 [1987], appeal dismissed and lv denied 70 NY2d 871 [1987]).

In his Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) application, petitioner never requested transcripts of the videotapes. The IAS court was thus under no obligation to consider that request, and it will not be entertained on appeal.

We have examined petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them without merit. Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Ellerin, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

The Law Lion logoThe Law Lion.

The Law Lion is the only platform combining AI legal writing grounded in real case law with an expert human writing service — serving attorneys, paralegals, and everyday people nationwide.

info@thelawlion.com
Mon–Fri 9am–6pm EST · Rush available
Serving Clients Nationwide

AI Tool

  • → AI Legal Writing Tool
  • → AI Document Drafting
  • → Motion Drafting
  • → Contract Drafting
  • → Legal Research
  • → Case Law Search
  • → Citation Generator
  • → Document Review
  • → Contract Review
  • → For Lawyers

Writing Service

  • → Eviction Defense
  • → Court Documents
  • → Custody & Family
  • → Divorce Documents
  • → Debt & Collections
  • → All Writing Services

Top Guides

  • → Eviction Response Guide
  • → Best AI Legal Tools 2026
  • → Debt Validation Letter Guide

Company

  • → About The Law Lion
  • → Client Results
  • → Transparent Pricing
  • → Legal Guides & Blog
  • → Contact & Free Consult
  • → Affiliate Program

Top Services

  • → Eviction Notice Response
  • → Debt Validation Letter
  • → Court Summons Response
© 2026 The Law Lion LLC · AI Legal Writing & Expert Document Service
Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceSitemap