From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

City of Rochester v. Chiarella

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Oct 11, 1984
472 N.E.2d 46 (N.Y. 1984)

Opinion

Argued September 13, 1984

Decided October 11, 1984

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, Robert A. Contiguglia, J.

Joseph A. Regan and Mary Jane Angelone for appellants.

Louis N. Kash, Corporation Counsel, for City of Rochester, respondent.

Kenneth A. Payment for subclass A2, respondents.

Edward H. Fox and Karl S. Essler for Angelo Chiarella, respondent.

Byron Johnson for subclass B, respondents.

Michael A. Rosenbloom for subclass C, respondents.



Order affirmed, without costs, for the reasons stated in the opinion by Justice John H. Doerr at the Appellate Division ( 98 A.D.2d 8) other than as it relates to the Statute of Limitations defense, that defense having been withdrawn. Question certified answered in the affirmative. We add that on this appeal the effect of the claims of nonprotestors on the right of protestors to full refund is not before us.

Concur: Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, JONES, WACHTLER, MEYER, SIMONS and KAYE.


Summaries of

City of Rochester v. Chiarella

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Oct 11, 1984
472 N.E.2d 46 (N.Y. 1984)
Case details for

City of Rochester v. Chiarella

Case Details

Full title:CITY OF ROCHESTER, Respondent, v. ANGELO CHIARELLA et al., Respondents…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Oct 11, 1984

Citations

472 N.E.2d 46 (N.Y. 1984)
472 N.E.2d 46
482 N.Y.S.2d 270

Citing Cases

Rochester v. Chiarella

When the appeal challenging the validity of the ordinance reached us, we held the ordinance constitutional…

Michael v. Afl-Cio

Most recently, the Court of Appeals affirmed, within the NY Constitution, article VIII, § 1 bar, the…