Jackson v. Carter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jackson v. Carter

29 A.D.3d 909, 814 N.Y.S.2d 549

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

DecidedMay 23, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 29 A.D.3d 909 (Jackson v. Carter) 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

Jackson v. Carter, 29 A.D.3d 909, 814 N.Y.S.2d 549 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to [910]*910CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, in effect, to prohibit the respondent, a Judge of the County Court, Nassau County, from proceeding with a criminal action entitled People v Jackson, pending under Nassau County Indictment No. 2826/05, and application for poor person relief.

Ordered that the branch of the application which is for poor person relief is granted to the extent that the .filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied as academic; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

Under the circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to a writ of prohibition (see Matter of Carey v Kitson, 93 AD2d 50 [1983]). Crane, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano and Dillon, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to [910]*910CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, in effect, to prohibit the respondent, a Judge of the County Court, Nassau County, from proceeding with a criminal action entitled People v Jackson, pending under Nassau County Indictment No. 2826/05, and application for poor person relief.

Ordered that the branch of the application which is for poor person relief is granted to the extent that the .filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied as academic; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

Under the circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to a writ of prohibition (see Matter of Carey v Kitson, 93 AD2d 50 [1983]). Crane, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano and Dillon, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.3d 909, 814 N.Y.S.2d 549, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-carter-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack