In re Yuan Tung C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Yuan Tung C.

296 A.D.2d 323, 744 N.Y.S.2d 671, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7152

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

DecidedJuly 2, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 296 A.D.2d 323 (In re Yuan Tung C.) 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 Yuan Tung C., 296 A.D.2d 323, 744 N.Y.S.2d 671, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7152 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Leah Marks, J.), entered on or about January 20, 1995, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon his admission that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of attempted grand larceny in the second degree, and placed him with the Division for Youth for a period of 18 months, unanimously dismissed as moot, without costs.

Appellant’s challenge to the court’s dispositional order is moot because that order expired in 1996 (see, Matter of Christopher H., 198 AD2d 120; Matter of Darryl G., 184 AD2d 204), and there is no basis upon which to review the order notwithstanding its mootness. In any event, the dispositional order was a proper exercise of discretion (see, Family Ct Act § 352.2 [2] [a]). Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

Appeal from order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Leah Marks, J.), entered on or about January 20, 1995, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon his admission that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of attempted grand larceny in the second degree, and placed him with the Division for Youth for a period of 18 months, unanimously dismissed as moot, without costs.

Appellant’s challenge to the court’s dispositional order is moot because that order expired in 1996 (see, Matter of Christopher H., 198 AD2d 120; Matter of Darryl G., 184 AD2d 204), and there is no basis upon which to review the order notwithstanding its mootness. In any event, the dispositional order was a proper exercise of discretion (see, Family Ct Act § 352.2 [2] [a]). Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

296 A.D.2d 323, 744 N.Y.S.2d 671, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-yuan-tung-c-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack