Levy v. Reitz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Levy v. Reitz

118 A.D.3d 702, 986 N.Y.S.2d 851

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

DecidedJune 4, 2014

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 118 A.D.3d 702 (Levy v. Reitz) 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

Levy v. Reitz, 118 A.D.3d 702, 986 N.Y.S.2d 851 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, to prohibit the respondent James Reitz, a Judge of the County Court, Putnam County, from enforcing an order dated November 14, 2013, in effect, dismissing the Superior Court Information in a criminal action entitle People v Schepart, commenced in the Justice Court of the Town of Putnam Valley and transferred to the County Court, Putnam County, under Superior Court information No. 261/11.

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

The petitioner seeks to prohibit enforcement of an order dated November 14, 2013. This proceeding was not commenced until April 11, 2014. Accordingly, it must be dismissed as time-barred (see Matter of Holtzman v Marrus, 74 NY2d 865 [1989]).

Dillon, J.E, Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, to prohibit the respondent James Reitz, a Judge of the County Court, Putnam County, from enforcing an order dated November 14, 2013, in effect, dismissing the Superior Court Information in a criminal action entitle People v Schepart, commenced in the Justice Court of the Town of Putnam Valley and transferred to the County Court, Putnam County, under Superior Court information No. 261/11.

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

The petitioner seeks to prohibit enforcement of an order dated November 14, 2013. This proceeding was not commenced until April 11, 2014. Accordingly, it must be dismissed as time-barred (see Matter of Holtzman v Marrus, 74 NY2d 865 [1989]).

Dillon, J.E, Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 A.D.3d 702, 986 N.Y.S.2d 851, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levy-v-reitz-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack