Legal Opinion

Cruz v. Perales

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

Decided February 20, 1990PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, we conclude that the Supreme Court acted properly in denying her request for attorney’s fees pursuant to 42 USC § 1988. The record reflects that the petitioner has neither alleged nor presented any evidence whatsoever to establish a bona fide civil rights claim pursuant to 42 USC § 1983 so as to warrant an award of attorney’s fees (see, Matter of Kross v Perales, 156 AD2d 451; Matter of Rozier v Perales, 149 AD2d 710; Matter of Gelin v Perales, 149 AD2d 593, 595). Mollen, P. J., Brown, Kooper and Miller, JJ., concur.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gelin v. PeralesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  2. Rozier v. PeralesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  3. Kross v. PeralesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Ehrman v. PeralesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990