Morrison v. Hynes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Morrison v. Hynes

80 A.D.3d 616, 914 N.Y.S.2d 660

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

DecidedJanuary 11, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 80 A.D.3d 616 (Morrison v. Hynes) 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

Morrison v. Hynes, 80 A.D.3d 616, 914 N.Y.S.2d 660 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition and mandamus, inter alia, to compel the revocation of the consecutive sentences imposed on the petitioner, and application by the petitioner to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person.

Ordered that the application for leave to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied as academic; and it is further,

[617]*617Adjudged that the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

This Court does not have subject matter to jurisdiction to entertain this proceeding (see CPLR 7804 [b]; 506 [b]). Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Lott and Sgroi, 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 and mandamus, inter alia, to compel the revocation of the consecutive sentences imposed on the petitioner, and application by the petitioner to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person.

Ordered that the application for leave to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied as academic; and it is further,

[617]*617Adjudged that the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

This Court does not have subject matter to jurisdiction to entertain this proceeding (see CPLR 7804 [b]; 506 [b]). Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Lott and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 A.D.3d 616, 914 N.Y.S.2d 660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morrison-v-hynes-nyappdiv-2011.