Jagiello v. Moran

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jagiello v. Moran

40 A.D.2d 757, 337 N.Y.S.2d 622, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3652

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

DecidedOctober 26, 1972

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 40 A.D.2d 757 (Jagiello v. Moran) 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

Jagiello v. Moran, 40 A.D.2d 757, 337 N.Y.S.2d 622, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3652 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Petition unanimously dismissed, without costs. Memorandum: An application under article 78 of the CPLR may not be made to the Appellate Division as a substitute for an appeal from an order or judgment at Special Term. In this article 78 proceeding addressed directly to this court it appears that the written order made by Supreme Court on October 21, 1964 with respect to the custody and support of the two children of the petitioner herein was reversed on his appeal (24 A D 2d 544) and the alleged oral order made from the bench by the Justice Presiding at that hearing was not reduced to writing and entered. Such a direction has no validity and no appeal lies therefrom; nor will it support the present application. (Application in the nature of mandamus to reverse order of Oneida Special Term dismissing petition.) Present—Goldman, P. J., Del Vecchio, Witner, Moule and Henry, JJ.

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

Petition unanimously dismissed, without costs. Memorandum: An application under article 78 of the CPLR may not be made to the Appellate Division as a substitute for an appeal from an order or judgment at Special Term. In this article 78 proceeding addressed directly to this court it appears that the written order made by Supreme Court on October 21, 1964 with respect to the custody and support of the two children of the petitioner herein was reversed on his appeal (24 A D 2d 544) and the alleged oral order made from the bench by the Justice Presiding at that hearing was not reduced to writing and entered. Such a direction has no validity and no appeal lies therefrom; nor will it support the present application. (Application in the nature of mandamus to reverse order of Oneida Special Term dismissing petition.) Present—Goldman, P. J., Del Vecchio, Witner, Moule and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.2d 757, 337 N.Y.S.2d 622, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jagiello-v-moran-nyappdiv-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack