Matter of Joseph J. Watson v Edward J. McLauglin
Annotate this Case
Matter of Watson v McLauglin
2005 NY Slip Op 08047 [23 AD3d 1160]
Decided on November 1, 2005
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
Decided on November 1, 2005
Marlow, J.P., Nardelli, Williams, Sweeny, McGuire, JJ.
6997
[*1]In re Joseph J. Watson, etc., Petitioner, Hon.
v
Edward J. McLauglin, etc., et al., Respondents. Joseph J. Watson, petitioner pro se. Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, New York (Katherine E. Timon of counsel), for Hon. Edward J. McLaughlin, respondent. Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Dana Poole of counsel), for Robert M. Morgenthau, respondent.
Decided on November 1, 2005
Marlow, J.P., Nardelli, Williams, Sweeny, McGuire, JJ.
6997
[*1]In re Joseph J. Watson, etc., Petitioner, Hon.
v
Edward J. McLauglin, etc., et al., Respondents. Joseph J. Watson, petitioner pro se. Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, New York (Katherine E. Timon of counsel), for Hon. Edward J. McLaughlin, respondent. Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Dana Poole of counsel), for Robert M. Morgenthau, respondent.
Application for an order pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules denied and the petition dismissed,
without costs or disbursements. All concur. No opinion. Order filed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
