![Yvonne Dunn Et Al. v. Arthur Eickhoff Et Al.](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![Yvonne Dunn Et Al. v. Arthur Eickhoff Et Al.](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
Yvonne Dunn Et Al. v. Arthur Eickhoff Et Al.
1974.NY.43475 319 N.E.2D 709; 35 N.Y.2D 698
-
- € 0,99
-
- € 0,99
Publisher Description
Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs, on the majority opinion at the Appellate Division, with the following added comments: The disbarrment of a lawyer creates no "nullities", the person involved simply loses all license to practice law, that is, to hold himself out as a lawyer or to receive compensation for legal services. As for the infant plaintiff, he is generally bound, with obvious limitations, by those who act in his behalf for better or for worse, but mostly for his benefit (Matter of Hawley, 100 N. Y. 206, 211). Otherwise, as a practical matter, none would be able to deal with an infants affairs, to his detriment.
More Books by Court of Appeals of New York
Church Scientology New York v. State New York Et Al.
1979
Matter Estate Mark Rothko
1977
Montana Petroleum Tank Release Compensation Board v. Crumleys
2008
Incorporated Village Nyack v. Daytop Village
1991
Roberta Rinaldo Et Al. v. Arthur Mcgovern
1991
People State New York v. Timothy B. Cooper
1991