Matter of Pettus v Hubert
Annotate this CaseDecided on November 28, 2017
Richter, J.P., Kapnick, Webber, Oing, Singh, JJ.
5058 123/17 -5258
[*1]In re James Pettus, Petitioner,
v
James W. Hubert, Respondent.
James Pettus, petitioner pro se.
John W. McConnell, New York (Shawn Kerby of counsel), for respondent.
The above-named petitioner having presented an application to this Court praying for an order, pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules,
Now, upon reading and filing the papers in said proceeding, and due deliberation having been had thereon,
It is unanimously ordered that the application be and the same hereby is denied and the petition dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: NOVEMBER 28, 2017
CLERK
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.