Legal Opinion

Carey v. Moore

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

Decided April 15, 1935PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Application denied. Per Curiam. There are three reasons why we cannot and do not pass upon the question sought to be raised by the petitioner on this motion. (1) From the moving papers it appears that a motion for the same relief was made at Special Term and that the motion was denied. Under these circumstances petitioner’s relief is by appeal rather than by a mandamus order. If the formal order has not been entered, so as to permit an appeal to be taken, petitioner has his remedy. If a party entitled to enter an order fails to do so promptly after the decision has been made, any interested…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Peet v. CowenhovenNew York Supreme Court · 1861

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. George W. Collins, Inc. v. Olsker-McLain Industries, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1965
  2. New York State Restaurant Ass'n v. Board of Standards & AppealsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963
  3. Muka v. BryantAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
  4. Charalabidis v. ElnagarAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API