Mack v. Davidson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mack v. Davidson

40 A.D.2d 641, 336 N.Y.S.2d 418, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3769

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

DecidedOctober 12, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A.D.2d 641 (Mack v. Davidson) 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

Mack v. Davidson, 40 A.D.2d 641, 336 N.Y.S.2d 418, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3769 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on September 13, 1972, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs and without disbursements, and vacated. In this article 78 proceeding, petitioner, a member of the Bar of the State of New York, brings up for review his punishment by fine for contempt committed in the presence of the court during the selection of a jury in the matter of People v. Ford. While counsel was perhaps overzealous in pursuing his contention of race discrimination during the voir dire and in his colloquy with the court, his attitude and conduct did not reach the level of contempt. Concur — McGivern, J. P., Markewich, Nunez, Kupferman and Murphy, JJ.

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

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on September 13, 1972, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs and without disbursements, and vacated. In this article 78 proceeding, petitioner, a member of the Bar of the State of New York, brings up for review his punishment by fine for contempt committed in the presence of the court during the selection of a jury in the matter of People v. Ford. While counsel was perhaps overzealous in pursuing his contention of race discrimination during the voir dire and in his colloquy with the court, his attitude and conduct did not reach the level of contempt. Concur — McGivern, J. P., Markewich, Nunez, Kupferman and Murphy, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.2d 641, 336 N.Y.S.2d 418, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mack-v-davidson-nyappdiv-1972.