In re Roth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Roth

16 A.D.2d 798

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

DecidedMay 7, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 16 A.D.2d 798 (In re Roth) 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 Roth, 16 A.D.2d 798 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Application for admission to the Bar denied. It appears from the record submitted that the applicant has not been “an actual resident of the State of New York for six months prior to the filing of his application for admission to practice ”, as required by rule (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 1, subd. [f], par. [3]; cf. Matter of Horwitz, 276 App. Div. 918). This denial is without prejudice to a renewal of the application upon proof by the applicant of his compliance with the rule as to residence (see Matter of Horwitz, supra). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

Application for admission to the Bar denied. It appears from the record submitted that the applicant has not been “an actual resident of the State of New York for six months prior to the filing of his application for admission to practice ”, as required by rule (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 1, subd. [f], par. [3]; cf. Matter of Horwitz, 276 App. Div. 918). This denial is without prejudice to a renewal of the application upon proof by the applicant of his compliance with the rule as to residence (see Matter of Horwitz, supra). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.2d 798, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-roth-nyappdiv-1962.