From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kaminsky v. Connolly

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 3, 1977
41 N.Y.2d 1068 (N.Y. 1977)

Opinion

Argued March 21, 1977

Decided May 3, 1977

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, THOMAS C. CHIMERA, J.

Joseph M. Schwartz for appellant.

Stanley M. Berman for respondent.


MEMORANDUM. The suit against the union was properly brought (see CPLR 1025; General Association Law, § 13; see, also, 1 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N Y Civ Prac, par 305.04, p 3-165 [1975]), and State courts have jurisdiction of the matter (see Vaca v Sipes, 386 U.S. 171, 176-188). Since plaintiff has, in our view, failed to show any breach by the union of the duty of fair representation, our review need go no further. Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and COOKE concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.


Summaries of

Kaminsky v. Connolly

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 3, 1977
41 N.Y.2d 1068 (N.Y. 1977)
Case details for

Kaminsky v. Connolly

Case Details

Full title:HARRY KAMINSKY, Appellant, v. FRANK J. CONNOLLY, as Secretary and…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: May 3, 1977

Citations

41 N.Y.2d 1068 (N.Y. 1977)
396 N.Y.S.2d 176
364 N.E.2d 841

Citing Cases

Trainosky v. Civil Service Employees Ass'n

It is well settled that a union breaches its duty of fair representation only when its conduct toward the…

Herington v. Civil Service Employees Ass'n

Memorandum: We affirm for reasons stated in the memorandum decision at Supreme Court (Scudder, J.). We add…