Legal Opinion
In re the Director of the Assigned Counsel Plan
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 16, 1993PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Budd G. Goodman, J.
The Director of the Assigned Counsel Plan of the City of New York (hereinafter referred to as the Director) has returned to this court for reconsideration two vouchers previously approved by this court for compensation for expert services rendered in two cases in which this court appointed Hillel Bodek, M.S.W., C.S.W. to provide forensic clinical social work services pursuant to County Law § 722-c. In support of this application, the Director attached a copy of Administrative Order 73/92 of the Chief Administrator of the Courts dated February 6, 1992…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Ake v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- People v. SelikoffNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Werfel v. AgrestaNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. PerryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1967
- People v. ScalaNew York Supreme Court · 1985
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Katt v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2001
- Thomas v. KuhlmanDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2003
- People v. BrismanNew York Supreme Court · 1996
- In re the Director of the Assigned Counsel PlanNew York Supreme Court · 1993
- Levenson v. LippmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.