McKiernan v. Shapiro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McKiernan v. Shapiro

263 A.D.2d 490, 691 N.Y.S.2d 914, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7890

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

DecidedJuly 12, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 263 A.D.2d 490 (McKiernan v. Shapiro) 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

McKiernan v. Shapiro, 263 A.D.2d 490, 691 N.Y.S.2d 914, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7890 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondent Fred L. Shapiro, an Acting Justice of the Supreme Court, to sign a final order finding the petitioner in civil contempt conforming to the decision read into the record on January 29, 1999.

Motion by the respondent Fred L. Shapiro to dismiss the proceeding.

Ordered that the motion to dismiss is granted; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is dismissed as academic.

The respondent has issued an order in the above-entitled proceeding and therefore the motion is granted, the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed. Ritter, J. P., Friedmann, McGinity and Smith, 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 mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondent Fred L. Shapiro, an Acting Justice of the Supreme Court, to sign a final order finding the petitioner in civil contempt conforming to the decision read into the record on January 29, 1999.

Motion by the respondent Fred L. Shapiro to dismiss the proceeding.

Ordered that the motion to dismiss is granted; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is dismissed as academic.

The respondent has issued an order in the above-entitled proceeding and therefore the motion is granted, the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed. Ritter, J. P., Friedmann, McGinity and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.D.2d 490, 691 N.Y.S.2d 914, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7890, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckiernan-v-shapiro-nyappdiv-1999.