Vaughn v. Hubert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vaughn v. Hubert

106 A.D.3d 750, 963 N.Y.S.2d 879

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

DecidedMay 1, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 106 A.D.3d 750 (Vaughn v. Hubert) 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

Vaughn v. Hubert, 106 A.D.3d 750, 963 N.Y.S.2d 879 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus to compel the respondent James W. Hubert, a Judge of the County Court, Westchester County, to determine the petitioner’s motion pursuant to CPL 440.10. 440.20 and 440.46, and application by the petitioner for poor person relief.

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

Adjudged that the petition is denied as academic, and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The instant proceeding has been rendered academic in light of the respondent’s order dated January 8, 2013. Eng, P.J., Rivera, Dickerson and Lott, 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 mandamus to compel the respondent James W. Hubert, a Judge of the County Court, Westchester County, to determine the petitioner’s motion pursuant to CPL 440.10. 440.20 and 440.46, and application by the petitioner for poor person relief.

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

Adjudged that the petition is denied as academic, and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The instant proceeding has been rendered academic in light of the respondent’s order dated January 8, 2013. Eng, P.J., Rivera, Dickerson and Lott, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

106 A.D.3d 750, 963 N.Y.S.2d 879, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vaughn-v-hubert-nyappdiv-2013.