Legal Opinion

Roulan v. County of Onondaga

New York Court of Appeals

Decided April 30, 2013PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be modified, *904without costs, in accordance with this memorandum and, as so modified, affirmed.

Article 18-B of the County Law requires each county to put in place a plan for making counsel available to indigent persons entitled to the appointment of counsel, principally criminal defendants. County Law § 722 provides several options for counties to fulfill this obligation, including ‘‘furnishing counsel] pursuant to ... a plan of a bar association” (see County Law § 722 [3]). To this end, Onondaga County has contracted…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Society of Plastics Industry, Inc. v. County of SuffolkNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
  2. Roulan v. County of OnondagaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Zeigler v. New YorkDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2013
  2. Matter of Stewart Park & Reserve Coalition, Inc. v. Town of New Windsor Zoning Bd. of AppealsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
  3. County of Onondaga v. BrunettiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  4. COUNTY OF ONONDAGA v. BRUNETTI, JOHN J.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  5. County of Onondaga v. BrunettiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API