McCord v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McCord v. State

63 A.D.3d 1120, 881 N.Y.S.2d 320

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

DecidedJune 30, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 63 A.D.3d 1120 (McCord v. State) 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

McCord v. State, 63 A.D.3d 1120, 881 N.Y.S.2d 320 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

In a claim, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, Stephen R. Krawitz, LLC, the attorney for the claimants, appeals from an order of the Court of Claims (Mignano, J), dated September 12, 2008, which denied its motion pursuant to CFLR 321 (b) (2) for leave to withdraw as their counsel.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Court of Claims did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the nonparty appellant’s motion for leave to withdraw as counsel for the claimants (see George v George, 217 AD2d 913 [1995]; Haskell v Haskell, 185 AD2d 333 [1992]).

The nonparty-appellant’s remaining contentions either are improperly raised for the first time on appeal, or are without merit. Fisher, J.E, Florio, Covello and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

In a claim, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, Stephen R. Krawitz, LLC, the attorney for the claimants, appeals from an order of the Court of Claims (Mignano, J), dated September 12, 2008, which denied its motion pursuant to CFLR 321 (b) (2) for leave to withdraw as their counsel.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Court of Claims did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the nonparty appellant’s motion for leave to withdraw as counsel for the claimants (see George v George, 217 AD2d 913 [1995]; Haskell v Haskell, 185 AD2d 333 [1992]).

The nonparty-appellant’s remaining contentions either are improperly raised for the first time on appeal, or are without merit. Fisher, J.E, Florio, Covello and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 A.D.3d 1120, 881 N.Y.S.2d 320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccord-v-state-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack