Accardo v. City of Niagara Falls

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Accardo v. City of Niagara Falls

204 A.D.2d 1050, 613 N.Y.S.2d 106

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 27, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 204 A.D.2d 1050 (Accardo v. City of Niagara Falls) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Accardo v. City of Niagara Falls, 204 A.D.2d 1050, 613 N.Y.S.2d 106 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed with costs to petitioners, judgment ordered granting counsel fees on appeal and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted judgment declaring that respondents’ unilateral layoffs, without the approval of the City Council, of certain employees whose positions were established and funded in the 1994 Adopted Budget, were void, illegal and in violation of section 5.8 (b) of the Niagara Falls City Charter. We modify the third and sixth decretal paragraphs of the judgment, however, to declare that employees holding temporary positions, whose layoffs are prohibited, do not include, as petitioners acknowledge, those seasonal or temporary employees whose services are no longer needed or are not presently required for the 1994 fiscal year.

Furthermore, we conclude that, under the circumstances of this case, petitioners are entitled to an award of counsel fees on this appeal, we remit the matter to Supreme Court for a hearing on the reasonable amount of those fees, and we order that judgment be entered accordingly (see, Matter of Wilson v Allegany County, 175 AD2d 645, 646; see also, Cahn v Town of Huntington, 29 NY2d 451). In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Mintz, J.—Declaratory Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Fallon, Wesley, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed with costs to petitioners, judgment ordered granting counsel fees on appeal and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted judgment declaring that respondents’ unilateral layoffs, without the approval of the City Council, of certain employees whose positions were established and funded in the 1994 Adopted Budget, were void, illegal and in violation of section 5.8 (b) of the Niagara Falls City Charter. We modify the third and sixth decretal paragraphs of the judgment, however, to declare that employees holding temporary positions, whose layoffs are prohibited, do not include, as petitioners acknowledge, those seasonal or temporary employees whose services are no longer needed or are not presently required for the 1994 fiscal year.

Furthermore, we conclude that, under the circumstances of this case, petitioners are entitled to an award of counsel fees on this appeal, we remit the matter to Supreme Court for a hearing on the reasonable amount of those fees, and we order that judgment be entered accordingly (see, Matter of Wilson v Allegany County, 175 AD2d 645, 646; see also, Cahn v Town of Huntington, 29 NY2d 451). In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Mintz, J.—Declaratory Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Fallon, Wesley, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 A.D.2d 1050, 613 N.Y.S.2d 106, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/accardo-v-city-of-niagara-falls-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack