Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword or section
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Document

Document

Ratings: (0)|Views: 4,491 |Likes:
Published by Nick Reisman

More info:

Published by: Nick Reisman on Mar 17, 2014
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/26/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: PART 16 ----------------------------------------------------------------------x STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE INTERNATIONAL and DANIEL ODESCALCHI, Petitioners, - against - COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE PUBLIC CORRUPTION, Respondent. : : : : : : : : : : : : Index No. 161554/2013 Honorable Alice Schlesinger
Oral Argument Requested
----------------------------------------------------------------------x
MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF PETITION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS AND FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER AND IN OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO COMPEL
Joanna C. Hendon Christopher W. Dysard Richard M. Benjamin Benjamin Silverman SPEARS & IMES LLP 51 Madison Avenue  New York, NY 10010 (212) 213-6996
 Attorneys for Petitioners
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/13/2014
INDEX NO. 161554/2013NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/13/2014
 
 
i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .......................................................................................................... ii PRELIMINARY STATEMENT .....................................................................................................1 RELEVANT FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK .................................4 A.
 
Common Sense Has Complied with Federal Law ...................................................6 B.
 
Common Sense Complied with New York’s Lobbying Laws .................................8 C.
 
Common Sense Complied with New York’s Election Laws ...................................9 ARGUMENT .................................................................................................................................10 I.
 
THE COMMISSION WAS NOT AUTHORIZED TO ISSUE THE SUBPOENAS ...........................................................................................................10 II.
 
THE INFORMATION SOUGHT IS NOT RELEVANT TO THE MORELAND COMMISSION’S TASK ...................................................................................................15 A.
 
The Commission Cannot Explain How the Subpoenaed Information Is Relevant to its Mandate ........................................................................................15 i.
 
The Commission Cannot Explain How the Names It Seeks Are Relevant to its Mandate .............................................................................................15 ii.
 
The Commission No Longer Has Need for the Names it Seeks ................17 B.
 
The Commission Cannot Demonstrate Relevance Through Ad Hominem Attacks and Innuendo ............................................................................................20 III.
 
THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTS FROM DISCLOSURE THE NAMES SOUGHT BY THE SUBPOENA ......................................................................................22 A.
 
The Information Requested by the Commission Implicates Significant First Amendment Concerns ...................................................................................23 B.
 
 No Compelling State Interest Warrants Disclosure ...............................................28 IV.
 
THE COMMISSION’S SUBPOENAS ARE PREEMPTED BY THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE ........................................................................................30 CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................................................33
 
ii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
 
Cases
 
 A’Hearn v. Comm’n on Unlawful Practice of Law in N.Y. County Lawyers’ Ass’n
, 23 N.Y.2d 916 (1969) ..............................................................................................................10
 Arizona v. United States
, 132 S. Ct. 2492 (2012) .............................................................................................................30
 Bailey v. Me. Comm’n on Gov’t Ethics and Election Practices
, 900 F. Supp. 2d 75 (D. Me. 2012) ...........................................................................................27
 Biscone v. JetBlue Airways Corp.
, 957 N.Y.S.2d 361 (2d Dep’t 2012) ..........................................................................................31
 Buckley v. Valeo
, 424 U.S. 1 (1976) .................................................................................................................9, 29
Citizens United v. FEC 
, 558 U.S. 310 (2010) ...............................................................................................15, 16, 21, 24
Ctr. For Individual Freedom v. Madigan
, 697 F.3d 464 (7th Cir. 2012) ...................................................................................................29
 DeGregory v. Attorney Gen. of State of N.H.
, 383 U.S. 825 (1966) .................................................................................................................28
 Ex Parte Lowe
, 887 S.W.2d 1 (Tex. 1981) ........................................................................................................29
FEC v. Larouche Campaign
, 817 F.2d 233 (2d Cir. 1987)...................................................................................15, 20, 22, 23
Gibson v. Fla. Legislative Investigation Comm.
, 372 U.S. 539 (1963) .................................................................................................................28
Ginett v. Computer Task Group, Inc.
, 962 F.2d 1085 (2d Cir. 1992)...................................................................................................12
Golden v. Clark 
, 76 N.Y.2d 618 (1990) ..............................................................................................................23
 Hillman v. Maretta
, 133 S. Ct. 1493 (2013) .............................................................................................................30

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->