In re Schamel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Schamel

49 A.D.2d 786, 372 N.Y.S.2d 742, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10822

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

DecidedSeptember 23, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 49 A.D.2d 786 (In re Schamel) 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 Schamel, 49 A.D.2d 786, 372 N.Y.S.2d 742, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10822 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

By order entered December 20, 1974, respondent was removed for cause from the office of Justice of the Town Court of the Town of Chemung. (Matter of Schamel, 46 AD2d 236, app dsmd 36 NY2d 713, mot for lv to app den 36 NY2d 642.) On January 14, 1975 respondent was appointed by the Town Board of the Town of Chemung to fill the unexpired term of the office from which he had just been removed, and respondent accepted the appointment. This proceeding was instituted pursuant to an order of this court entered March 10, 1975, and upon respondent’s filing an answer to the petition herein, petitioner moved for summary judgment. Motion granted, without costs, and respondent removed from office. Respondent is ineligible, as a matter of law, for appointment to the unexpired term of the office from which he was removed for cause. (People v Ahearn, 196 NY 221.) In view of respondent’s persistent violations of the directives of this court, respondent is hereafter prohibited from holding a judicial office, elective or appointive. Herlihy, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Koreman and Larkin, JJ., concur.

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

By order entered December 20, 1974, respondent was removed for cause from the office of Justice of the Town Court of the Town of Chemung. (Matter of Schamel, 46 AD2d 236, app dsmd 36 NY2d 713, mot for lv to app den 36 NY2d 642.) On January 14, 1975 respondent was appointed by the Town Board of the Town of Chemung to fill the unexpired term of the office from which he had just been removed, and respondent accepted the appointment. This proceeding was instituted pursuant to an order of this court entered March 10, 1975, and upon respondent’s filing an answer to the petition herein, petitioner moved for summary judgment. Motion granted, without costs, and respondent removed from office. Respondent is ineligible, as a matter of law, for appointment to the unexpired term of the office from which he was removed for cause. (People v Ahearn, 196 NY 221.) In view of respondent’s persistent violations of the directives of this court, respondent is hereafter prohibited from holding a judicial office, elective or appointive. Herlihy, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Koreman and Larkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.2d 786, 372 N.Y.S.2d 742, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10822, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-schamel-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack