From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MATTER OF HUIE

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Apr 18, 1968
238 N.E.2d 503 (N.Y. 1968)

Opinion

Submitted April 1, 1968

Decided April 18, 1968


Motion to amend remittitur granted. Return of remittitur requested and, when returned, it will be amended by adding thereto the following: Upon the appeal herein there was presented and necessarily passed upon a question under the Constitution of the United States, viz.: Whether under Wisconsin Elec. Power Co. v. Milwaukee ( 352 U.S. 948) we were bound, despite our own procedural rule that reargument on the basis of a subsequent appellate court decision may not be granted by our lower courts after the time to appeal from their decisions has elapsed, to consider claimant's contention that the form of notice provided herein was insufficient under Schroeder v. City of New York ( 371 U.S. 208). The Court of Appeals, in passing upon this contention, held that Wisconsin Elec. Power Co. v. Milwaukee ( supra) did not require that our rule as to what may be considered on such a motion for reargument be modified and therefore did not reach the question of the applicability of Schroeder v. City of New York ( supra).


Summaries of

MATTER OF HUIE

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Apr 18, 1968
238 N.E.2d 503 (N.Y. 1968)
Case details for

MATTER OF HUIE

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of IRVING V.A. HUIE et al., Constituting the Board of Water…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Apr 18, 1968

Citations

238 N.E.2d 503 (N.Y. 1968)
238 N.E.2d 503
291 N.Y.S.2d 14

Citing Cases

Pigno v. Bunim

(See, generally, 2A Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N.Y. Civ Prac, par 2221.03.) Under the circumstances presented…

MEN'S WORLD OUTLET, INC. v. STEINBERG

In an action for a permanent mandatory injunction, defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much…