In re McCue

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re McCue

281 A.D.2d 420, 721 N.Y.S.2d 262, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2053

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

DecidedMarch 5, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 281 A.D.2d 420 (In re McCue) 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 McCue, 281 A.D.2d 420, 721 N.Y.S.2d 262, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2053 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law § 9.60 to authorize assisted outpatient treatment, the appeal is from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Cutrona, J.), dated May 5, 2000, which granted the petition.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The order and judgment authorizing assisted outpatient treatment for a period of 180 days expired in November 2000, without a timely application for an extension having been made (see, Mental Hygiene Law § 9.60 [k]). Accordingly, the instant appeal is now academic and does not fall within an exception to the mootness doctrine (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715; Matter of David C., 69 NY2d 796, 798). Ritter, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law § 9.60 to authorize assisted outpatient treatment, the appeal is from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Cutrona, J.), dated May 5, 2000, which granted the petition.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The order and judgment authorizing assisted outpatient treatment for a period of 180 days expired in November 2000, without a timely application for an extension having been made (see, Mental Hygiene Law § 9.60 [k]). Accordingly, the instant appeal is now academic and does not fall within an exception to the mootness doctrine (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715; Matter of David C., 69 NY2d 796, 798). Ritter, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D.2d 420, 721 N.Y.S.2d 262, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2053, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-mccue-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack