Morrow v. Cahill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Morrow v. Cahill

278 A.D.2d 123, 718 N.Y.S.2d 315, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14002

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

DecidedDecember 19, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 278 A.D.2d 123 (Morrow v. Cahill) 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

Morrow v. Cahill, 278 A.D.2d 123, 718 N.Y.S.2d 315, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14002 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley Sklar, J.), entered on or about December 8, 1999, which denied petitioner’s application pursuant to CPLR article 78 challenging respondent Departmental Disciplinary Committee’s determination not to institute proceedings against petitioner’s former counsel, and dismissed the proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner, who is not the licensee, does not have standing since there is no direct and harmful effect on him (see, Matter of Altamore v Barrios-Paoli, 90 NY2d 378, 384; Mantell v New York State Commn. on Judicial Conduct, 277 AD2d 96). Concur — Lerner, J. P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley Sklar, J.), entered on or about December 8, 1999, which denied petitioner’s application pursuant to CPLR article 78 challenging respondent Departmental Disciplinary Committee’s determination not to institute proceedings against petitioner’s former counsel, and dismissed the proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner, who is not the licensee, does not have standing since there is no direct and harmful effect on him (see, Matter of Altamore v Barrios-Paoli, 90 NY2d 378, 384; Mantell v New York State Commn. on Judicial Conduct, 277 AD2d 96). Concur — Lerner, J. P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 A.D.2d 123, 718 N.Y.S.2d 315, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14002, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morrow-v-cahill-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack