Ackridge v. Walker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ackridge v. Walker

28 A.D.3d 477, 811 N.Y.S.2d 578

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 4, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 28 A.D.3d 477 (Ackridge v. Walker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ackridge v. Walker, 28 A.D.3d 477, 811 N.Y.S.2d 578 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondent, Samuel Walker, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, to determine the petitioner’s motion pursuant to CPL 440.10, inter alia, to vacate a judgment rendered October 8, 2003, in People v Ackridge, under Westchester County indictment No. 03-0573.

Ordered that the application to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied as academic; and it is further,

Adjudged that the proceeding is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

[478]*478By order dated January 13, 2006, the Supreme Court, Westchester County, denied the petitioner’s motion pursuant to CPL 440.10. The present proceeding is therefore academic. Florio, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Lifson, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondent, Samuel Walker, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, to determine the petitioner’s motion pursuant to CPL 440.10, inter alia, to vacate a judgment rendered October 8, 2003, in People v Ackridge, under Westchester County indictment No. 03-0573.

Ordered that the application to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied as academic; and it is further,

Adjudged that the proceeding is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

[478]*478By order dated January 13, 2006, the Supreme Court, Westchester County, denied the petitioner’s motion pursuant to CPL 440.10. The present proceeding is therefore academic. Florio, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Lifson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 A.D.3d 477, 811 N.Y.S.2d 578, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ackridge-v-walker-nyappdiv-2006.