Reeves v. Wyman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Reeves v. Wyman

30 A.D.2d 656, 292 N.Y.S.2d 354, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3697

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

DecidedJune 20, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 30 A.D.2d 656 (Reeves v. Wyman) 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

Reeves v. Wyman, 30 A.D.2d 656, 292 N.Y.S.2d 354, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3697 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of the respondent unanimously confirmed, without costs or disbursements, and without prejudice to the bringing of a new proceeding, if it should develop that the money required to pay the consolidated college registration fee shall not be available to petitioner through some community program. From the record before us, it is quite apparent that the respondent did not act improperly in refusing to advance to the petitioner the money required to pay the consolidated college registration fee. The evidence indicates the availability of the money through a community program. Indeed, such money, heretofore, had been advanced to the petitioner from such source, and it seems that it is presently available from the same source. If, however, it should develop that it is not so available, then the petitioner may make a new application. Concur — Botein, P. J., Eager, Capozzoli, Rabin and McNally, JJ.

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

Determination of the respondent unanimously confirmed, without costs or disbursements, and without prejudice to the bringing of a new proceeding, if it should develop that the money required to pay the consolidated college registration fee shall not be available to petitioner through some community program. From the record before us, it is quite apparent that the respondent did not act improperly in refusing to advance to the petitioner the money required to pay the consolidated college registration fee. The evidence indicates the availability of the money through a community program. Indeed, such money, heretofore, had been advanced to the petitioner from such source, and it seems that it is presently available from the same source. If, however, it should develop that it is not so available, then the petitioner may make a new application. Concur — Botein, P. J., Eager, Capozzoli, Rabin and McNally, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.2d 656, 292 N.Y.S.2d 354, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3697, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reeves-v-wyman-nyappdiv-1968.