Fedick v. Sprague

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fedick v. Sprague

176 A.D.2d 1190, 578 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13825

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

DecidedOctober 4, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 176 A.D.2d 1190 (Fedick v. Sprague) 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

Fedick v. Sprague, 176 A.D.2d 1190, 578 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13825 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

— Petition unanimously dismissed without costs as moot. Memorandum: The record demonstrates that the relief that petitioner seeks in an original CPLR article 78 proceeding commenced in this Court pursuant to CPLR 506 (b) (1) and 7804 (b) was previously granted to him by a “Memorandum Decision and Order” of the Cattaraugus County Court dated August 25, 1989.

Petitioner’s motion seeking reargument was denied by order dated October 12, 1989. The petition, therefore, is moot. Moreover, the record does not establish the existence of a CPL 440.10 motion pending before the Cattaraugus County Court Judge named as respondent herein. (Original Article 78 Proceeding.) Present — Denman, J. P., Boomer, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

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

— Petition unanimously dismissed without costs as moot. Memorandum: The record demonstrates that the relief that petitioner seeks in an original CPLR article 78 proceeding commenced in this Court pursuant to CPLR 506 (b) (1) and 7804 (b) was previously granted to him by a “Memorandum Decision and Order” of the Cattaraugus County Court dated August 25, 1989.

Petitioner’s motion seeking reargument was denied by order dated October 12, 1989. The petition, therefore, is moot. Moreover, the record does not establish the existence of a CPL 440.10 motion pending before the Cattaraugus County Court Judge named as respondent herein. (Original Article 78 Proceeding.) Present — Denman, J. P., Boomer, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

176 A.D.2d 1190, 578 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13825, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fedick-v-sprague-nyappdiv-1991.