AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

In the Matter of the ESTATE OF ALFRED D. RAPPAPORT et al., Appellants, v. JOHN B. RIORDAN, Respondents.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

A CPLR article 78 proceeding may not be used to seek review of issues that could have been raised on direct appeal ( see CPLR 7801; cf. Matter of Wong v Chetta, 271 AD2d 451; Matter of Tyler v Forma, 231 AD2d 891; Matter of Sans v Doyle, 175 AD2d 670, 671). Here, the petitioners failed to appeal from the underlying decree and may not obtain collateral review of the issues which could have been raised on direct appeal from the decree ( cf. Matter of Sans v Doyle, 175 AD2d 670). Therefore, the proceeding was properly dismissed ( cf. Matter of Wong v Chetta, 271 AD2d 451).

The petitioners' remaining contentions are without merit.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

RAPPAPORT v. RIORDAN
(Oct 27, 2009)