Mulroy v. Carey
373 N.E.2d 369, 43 N.Y.2d 819, 402 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1977 N.Y. LEXIS 2591
Opinions
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
Order affirmed, without costs, for the reasons stated in the opinion by Mr. Justice G. Robert Witmer at the Appellate Division (58 AD2d 207).
In affirming, no view is expressed whether in any or all circumstances the exercise of the executive power to supersede an elected District Attorney would be beyond judicial review or correction in a direct or collateral action or proceeding brought or defended by the county or the elected District Attorney involved.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Mulroy v. Carey, 373 N.E.2d 369, 43 N.Y.2d 819, 402 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1977 N.Y. LEXIS 2591 (N.Y. 1977).
373 N.E.2d 369 (Mulroy v. Carey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Kearns v. Cuomo
W.D. New York, 2019
Abelove v. Cuomo
57 Misc. 3d 668 (New York Supreme Court, 2017)
MATTER OF JOHNSON v. Pataki
691 N.E.2d 1002 (New York Court of Appeals, 1997)
Johnson v. Pataki
229 A.D.2d 242 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
In re Hennessy
400 N.E.2d 294 (New York Court of Appeals, 1979)
In re Carey
68 A.D.2d 220 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Supreme Court v. Doe
69 A.D.2d 955 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
In re Hennessy
67 A.D.2d 1089 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)