MATTER OF HOLTZMAN v. Marrus
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The judgment of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the petition dismissed.
The court had jurisdiction to try the case and the only question is whether it had the power to issue the preclusion order. Even if prohibition were available to challenge such an order the proceeding would have to be commenced within four months of the date on which the order became final and binding (CPLR 217). Because the order in this case went into effect immediately, the petition served on Justice Marrus more than four months after that date was untimely (see, Siegel, NY…
2Cited by19 opinions
- Doorley v. DeMarcoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Taub v. Committee on Professional StandardsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Smith v. BrownAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Brown v. SchulmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Levy v. ReitzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.