McCarthy v. Tedisco

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McCarthy v. Tedisco

176 A.D.2d 432, 574 N.Y.S.2d 303, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12424

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

DecidedSeptember 26, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 176 A.D.2d 432 (McCarthy v. Tedisco) 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

McCarthy v. Tedisco, 176 A.D.2d 432, 574 N.Y.S.2d 303, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12424 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Doran, J.), entered February 7, 1991 in Schenectady County, which dismissed the complaint for, inter alia, failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Since the time that plaintiff filed his notice of appeal, defendant James N. Tedisco has submitted an affidavit agreeing to change the symbol he uses in his campaign literature. Because this effectively grants plaintiff the relief he requested in the complaint, i.e., to enjoin Tedisco from using his current campaign symbol, this appeal has been rendered moot (see, Matter of Herald Co. v O’Brien, 149 AD2d 781, 782; Matter of Beyah v LeFevre, 142 AD2d 829).

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss and Crew III, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

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

— Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Doran, J.), entered February 7, 1991 in Schenectady County, which dismissed the complaint for, inter alia, failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Since the time that plaintiff filed his notice of appeal, defendant James N. Tedisco has submitted an affidavit agreeing to change the symbol he uses in his campaign literature. Because this effectively grants plaintiff the relief he requested in the complaint, i.e., to enjoin Tedisco from using his current campaign symbol, this appeal has been rendered moot (see, Matter of Herald Co. v O’Brien, 149 AD2d 781, 782; Matter of Beyah v LeFevre, 142 AD2d 829).

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss and Crew III, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

176 A.D.2d 432, 574 N.Y.S.2d 303, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12424, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccarthy-v-tedisco-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack