In Matter of Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Served on Museum of Modern Art (93 NY2d 729, 732, 719 NE2d 897, 697 NYS2d 538 [1999]), the Court were called upon to decide "whether Arts and Cultural Affairs Law 12.03, which protects the artwork of nonresident lenders from any kind of seizure while on exhibit in New York State, encompasses a subpoena duces tecum requiring production of two paintings ... on loan to the Museum of Modern Art in New York" from a museum in Vienna. The statute's bill jacket included a letter from a City Bar committee questioning whether the legislation, as drafted, might prevent a rightful owner from recovering stolen art, and proposing a distinction to prevent this from happening. The bill jacket also, however, included a memorandum from the Attorney General, cautioning against creating any such "loopholes" in the statute, which "would force potential good-faith lenders to seek legal advice before lending artwork to museums, thus defeating the bill's purpose" (id. at 737). The Legislature did not adopt the change recommended by City Bar; as a result, the statute did not include any language embodying City's Bar's proposed exemption. Citing Majewski, we stated that "it is well settled that legislative intent may be inferred from the omission of proposed substantive changes in the final legislative enactment. Thus, this history, coupled with the language of the statute, demonstrate a clear mandate from the Legislature. The statute's 'no loopholes' approach compels our holding that Arts and Cultural Affairs Law 12.03 is not limited to civil process" (id. at 738).