Benatovich v. Koessler
209 A.D.2d 983, 619 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11993
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Benatovich v. Koessler. Read the opinion of the Court — 209 A.D.2d 984 →
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 16, 1994·No. Appeal No. 1·Published
Opinion
—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memoran[984]*984dum: By failing to address the propriety of the order approving the Law Guardian’s fee application in his brief, plaintiff has abandoned that issue on appeal (see, Ciesinski v Town of Aurora, 202 AD2d 984). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Whelan, J.—Counsel Fees.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Wesley and Callahan, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Benatovich v. Koessler, 209 A.D.2d 983, 619 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11993 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).
209 A.D.2d 983 (Benatovich v. Koessler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Ciesinski v. Town of Aurora
202 A.D.2d 984 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)