In re Patel
666 N.E.2d 1051, 87 N.Y.2d 1041, 644 N.Y.S.2d 138, 1996 N.Y. LEXIS 1153
Opinion
[1042] Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from so much of the Appellate Division order as denied appellant’s motion for an order directing an investigation into alleged attorney misconduct, dismissed upon the ground that that part of the order does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
In re Patel, 666 N.E.2d 1051, 87 N.Y.2d 1041, 644 N.Y.S.2d 138, 1996 N.Y. LEXIS 1153 (N.Y. 1996).
666 N.E.2d 1051 (In re Patel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Topolski v. Jumbelic
64 A.D.3d 1198 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
In re Truong
22 A.D.3d 62 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Scott v. Workers' Compensation Board
275 A.D.2d 877 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Rigle v. County of Onondaga
267 A.D.2d 1088 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Coombs v. Village of Canaseraga
247 A.D.2d 895 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)