In re Grady

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Grady

37 A.D.2d 955, 326 N.Y.S.2d 536, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2903

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

DecidedNovember 30, 1971

StatusPublished

This text of 37 A.D.2d 955 (In re Grady) 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

In re Grady, 37 A.D.2d 955, 326 N.Y.S.2d 536, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2903 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, New York County, entered January 16, 1970, certifying appellant to the care and custody of the Narcotic Addiction 'Control Commission pursuant to the provisions of section 206 of the Mental Hygiene Law unanimously dismissed, without costs and without disbursements. Since appellant absconded from aftercare on May 10, 1971 and her present whereabouts are unknown, the appellant may not have her appeal heard (People v. Del Rio, 14 N Y 2d 165; People v. Sullivan, 28 N Y 2d 900; People v. Genet, 59 N. Y. 80; People v. Deutsch, 23 A D 2d 732; People v. Avila, 36 A D 2d 516; James v. Powell, 27 A D 2d 814, app. dsmd. 19 N Y 2d 984). We have, in any event, examined the merits and would affirm the judgment if the appeal were not to be dismissed. Concur — Stevens, P. J., Capozzoli, Nunez, Kupferman and Murphy, JJ.

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

—Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, New York County, entered January 16, 1970, certifying appellant to the care and custody of the Narcotic Addiction 'Control Commission pursuant to the provisions of section 206 of the Mental Hygiene Law unanimously dismissed, without costs and without disbursements. Since appellant absconded from aftercare on May 10, 1971 and her present whereabouts are unknown, the appellant may not have her appeal heard (People v. Del Rio, 14 N Y 2d 165; People v. Sullivan, 28 N Y 2d 900; People v. Genet, 59 N. Y. 80; People v. Deutsch, 23 A D 2d 732; People v. Avila, 36 A D 2d 516; James v. Powell, 27 A D 2d 814, app. dsmd. 19 N Y 2d 984). We have, in any event, examined the merits and would affirm the judgment if the appeal were not to be dismissed. Concur — Stevens, P. J., Capozzoli, Nunez, Kupferman and Murphy, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 A.D.2d 955, 326 N.Y.S.2d 536, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-grady-nyappdiv-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack