In re Foley
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
— Casey, J.
In this proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 77, respondents raise a number of procedural and substantive questions. First, they claim that the proposed conservatee, respondent William J. Foley, was not properly served with notice of the petition, as required by Mental Hygiene Law § 77.07 (a). Our review of the motion papers on this issue discloses the following facts. Petitioner’s attorney obtained an *893order to show cause in New York City, which he sent via Federal Express to Mary Colasurdo in Albany. Colasurdo, either alone or in the company of petitioner, went to the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- F. I. duPont, Glore Forgan & Co. v. ChenNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- In re DodgeNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- Weckstein v. BreitbartAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Saulo v. NoumiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- Helfand v. CohenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance v. RooseveltNew York Supreme Court · 1993
- Tri-State Sol-Aire Corp. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Oglesby v. BarraganAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- Fotopoulos v. BermanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Huber v. MonesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.