Wilkins v. James

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wilkins v. James

142 A.D.2d 1006, 530 N.Y.S.2d 1023, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15069

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

DecidedJuly 7, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 142 A.D.2d 1006 (Wilkins v. James) 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

Wilkins v. James, 142 A.D.2d 1006, 530 N.Y.S.2d 1023, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15069 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion to dismiss appeal denied as unnecessary; motion to be relieved of assignment or, alternatively, to extend time to perfect appeal denied, without prejudice, all in accordance with the following memorandum: The motion to dismiss is unnecessary because the appeal has been abandoned and deemed dismissed without the necessity of an order (22 NYCRR 1000.3 [b] [2]). The application of Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo to be relieved as assigned counsel and its alternative application for an extension of time to perfect the appeal are denied without prejudice to a motion to vacate the abandonment and dismissal of the appeal upon a showing of merit (see, 22 NYCRR 1000.3 [b] [2] [i]). Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Boomer, Pine and Lawton, JJ.

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

Motion to dismiss appeal denied as unnecessary; motion to be relieved of assignment or, alternatively, to extend time to perfect appeal denied, without prejudice, all in accordance with the following memorandum: The motion to dismiss is unnecessary because the appeal has been abandoned and deemed dismissed without the necessity of an order (22 NYCRR 1000.3 [b] [2]). The application of Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo to be relieved as assigned counsel and its alternative application for an extension of time to perfect the appeal are denied without prejudice to a motion to vacate the abandonment and dismissal of the appeal upon a showing of merit (see, 22 NYCRR 1000.3 [b] [2] [i]). Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Boomer, Pine and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

142 A.D.2d 1006, 530 N.Y.S.2d 1023, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15069, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilkins-v-james-nyappdiv-1988.