People ex rel. Harris v. Scully

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Harris v. Scully

114 A.D.2d 919, 495 N.Y.S.2d 660, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53962

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

DecidedNovember 12, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 114 A.D.2d 919 (People ex rel. Harris v. Scully) 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

People ex rel. Harris v. Scully, 114 A.D.2d 919, 495 N.Y.S.2d 660, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53962 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Wood, J.), dated June 26, 1981, as amended by an order of the same court (Delaney, J.), dated August 25, 1981, which transferred the proceeding to the County Court, Rensselaer County, for determination.

Appeal dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

No appeal lies from an intermediate order in a habeas corpus proceeding (CPLR 7011; People ex rel. Johnson v Romano, 108 AD2d 888; People ex rel. Ardito v Trujillo, 88 AD2d 1002). If we were not dismissing, we would affirm. The transfer was neither contrary to law nor an abuse of discretion (22 NYCRR 683.1 [a] [2]). Mollen, P. J., Lazer, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.

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

—In a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Wood, J.), dated June 26, 1981, as amended by an order of the same court (Delaney, J.), dated August 25, 1981, which transferred the proceeding to the County Court, Rensselaer County, for determination.

Appeal dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

No appeal lies from an intermediate order in a habeas corpus proceeding (CPLR 7011; People ex rel. Johnson v Romano, 108 AD2d 888; People ex rel. Ardito v Trujillo, 88 AD2d 1002). If we were not dismissing, we would affirm. The transfer was neither contrary to law nor an abuse of discretion (22 NYCRR 683.1 [a] [2]). Mollen, P. J., Lazer, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 A.D.2d 919, 495 N.Y.S.2d 660, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53962, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-harris-v-scully-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack