Werfel v. Fitzgerald
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
■ Per Curiam.
The appellants are -Clerks of the Criminal Court of the City of New York. The petitioner is an attorney. He instituted this article 78 proceeding in the nature of mandamus to compel the appellants ‘ ‘ to keep open during the business hours fixed by law, the docket books, dockets, informations, and files, other than those involving youthful offenders, for search and examination by any person ” and “to post appropriate notices to the public informing it of the right of inspection.” Instead of answering the petition, the appellants elected to move to dismiss it on the grounds of…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Stevenson v. News Syndicate Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1950
- Ex Parte UppercuSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Egan v. Board of Water Supply of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
- Daly v. DimockSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1887
- Cherkis v. ImpellitteriNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Hartford Courant Co. v. PellegrinoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
- In Re the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the PressCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1985
- Hynes v. KarassikNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Doe v. PatakiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
- Doe v. PatakiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.