The motion court correctly ruled that it had no authority to review Judge Rand's order reducing petitioner's fee. Trial court orders granting or denying increases in the statutorily recommended fees under County Law § 722-b are "essentially administrative in nature and, accordingly, are not amenable to judicial review on the merits by an appellate panel" (Matter of Director of Assigned Counsel Plan of City of N. Y. [Bodek],
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
MATTER OF GILMAN v. GOLFINOPOULOUS
284 A.D.2d 224 (2001)
726 N.Y.S.2d 271
In the Matter of DAVID GILMAN, Appellant, v. GEORGE GOLFINOPOULOUS, as Administrator of the City of New York 18-B Program, et al., Respondents.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided June 21, 2001.
Decided June 21, 2001.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
