Hill v. Rawiszer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hill v. Rawiszer

86 A.D.3d 615, 926 N.Y.2d 913

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

DecidedJuly 19, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 86 A.D.3d 615 (Hill v. Rawiszer) 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

Hill v. Rawiszer, 86 A.D.3d 615, 926 N.Y.2d 913 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

We have reviewed the record and agree with the appellant’s assigned counsel that, under the circumstances of this case, there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v California, 386 US 738 [1967]; Matter of Samantha G. [Luis G.], 82 AD3d 885 [2011]; Matter of Paola, 63 AD3d 743 [2009]; Matter of Duong v Duong, 51 AD3d 791 [2008]). Skelos, J.P., Leventhal, Austin and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

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

We have reviewed the record and agree with the appellant’s assigned counsel that, under the circumstances of this case, there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v California, 386 US 738 [1967]; Matter of Samantha G. [Luis G.], 82 AD3d 885 [2011]; Matter of Paola, 63 AD3d 743 [2009]; Matter of Duong v Duong, 51 AD3d 791 [2008]). Skelos, J.P., Leventhal, Austin and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 A.D.3d 615, 926 N.Y.2d 913, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-rawiszer-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack