From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Dinnerstein v. N.Y.S. D.H.C.R

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 12, 1999
257 A.D.2d 444 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

January 12, 1999.

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley Parness, J.).


Petitioner's submissions are insufficient to demonstrate that he was suffering from an incapacitating "mental disorder" at the time he entered into the stipulation, which he did in open court before the Special Referee, affirmatively representing that he understood the stipulation and had no questions concerning it, while represented by counsel ( see, Hallock v. State of New York, 64 N.Y.2d 224, 230; Citibank v. Rathjen, 202 A.D.2d 235, lv dismissed 84 N.Y.2d 850). Petitioner's psychiatrist's letter stated that he had stopped seeing petitioner more than a year before the hearing; his internist's letter merely stated that he was treating petitioner for certain physical ailments "that may well have arisen from excessive stress", but reported no independent observations of a state of confusion; and the letter from petitioner's friend, an attorney who was present before the Special Referee, admits that she did nothing to prevent the stipulation.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Lerner, Mazzarelli and Saxe, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of Dinnerstein v. N.Y.S. D.H.C.R

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 12, 1999
257 A.D.2d 444 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Matter of Dinnerstein v. N.Y.S. D.H.C.R

Case Details

Full title:In the MATTER OF STEPHEN DINNERSTEIN, Appellant, v. NEW YORK STATE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 12, 1999

Citations

257 A.D.2d 444 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
683 N.Y.S.2d 247

Citing Cases

Zurenda v. Zurenda

However, a showing that a party suffers from a disability is not necessarily equivalent to a showing that he…