ARKADY VAYGENSBERG, APPELLANT,
v.
ALEXANDER BARASH, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appellate court treated an appeal of a discovery order as a petition for writ of certiorari. The court denied the petition because the appellant failed to provide necessary transcripts and did not adequately support his Fifth Amendment claim.
No, the trial court did not err. The appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his Fifth Amendment claim, and the appellate court denied his petition for review.
[1] A party seeking review of a trial court's order granting a motion to compel discovery must provide transcripts of the hearings below.
[2] A litigant's assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege in a civil case must be supported by a showing sufficient for the trial court to determine that the litigant has r…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“In light of petitioner’s failure to provide transcripts of the hearings held below,1 and the absence of an evidentiary basis to support petitioner’s unadorned assertion of a Fifth Amendment claim,2 we deny the petition.”
This quote explains the primary reasons for denying the petition.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellee sought to compel the appellant to answer deposition questions and produce tax returns related to a money judgment. The appellant invoked …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Discovery In Aid Of Execution cases and more on FLexlaw
We treat this appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari, seeking review of the trial court’s order granting a motion to compel discovery in aid of execution on a money judgment previously entered against Arkady Vaygensberg (“petitioner”) in favor of Alexander Barash (“respondent”). During his deposition, petitioner asserted his Fifth Amendment right to refuse to answer questions regarding his income and whether he filed federal income tax returns for the immediately-preceding six years. Petitioner also invoked his Fifth Amendment right in response to respondent’s request for the production of *557petitioner’s personal federal income tax returns for those same years. Respondent filed a motion to compel petitioner to answer the deposition questions and to produce the requested tax returns. The trial court conducted two hearings on the motion and thereafter entered an order granting the motion to compel.
In light of petitioner’s failure to provide transcripts of the hearings held below,1 and the absence of an evidentiary basis to support petitioner’s unadorned assertion of a Fifth Amendment claim,2 we deny the petition.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ohad E. Guzi v. Off. of the Attorney Gen. (Fla. 4th DCA 2024)
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)
- Delisi v. Smith, 423 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)
- Rainerman v. Eagle Nat'l Bank OF Miami, 541 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)