Bell v. Village of Cornwall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bell v. Village of Cornwall

25 A.D.2d 561, 267 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4834

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

DecidedFebruary 28, 1966

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 25 A.D.2d 561 (Bell v. Village of Cornwall) 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

Bell v. Village of Cornwall, 25 A.D.2d 561, 267 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4834 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for a declaratory judgment, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, entered August 9, 1965, which granted defendants’ separate motions to dismiss the amended complaint. Order affirmed, without costs. Plaintiffs, as taxpayers, seek a declaratory judgment and injunction with respect to certain violations of an order of the Water Resources Commission of the Department of Conservation. In our opinion, the court should not initially assume jurisdiction over the factual issues presented in the ease at bar, which require the special knowledge, experience, informed judgment and service of the Water Resources Commission and an interpretation of its own directives (Far East Conference v. United States, 342 U. S. 570). We are also of the opinion that the interests of justice and the promotion of proper relationships between the courts and administrative agencies would best be served if plaintiffs were initially relegated to a determination by the commission of the matter of the alleged violations of the commission’s order and to such remedial.and enforcement facilities as may be available to the commission, subject, however, to such judicial review and proceedings as any of the participants may thereafter be advised to initiate.

Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Brennan, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for a declaratory judgment, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, entered August 9, 1965, which granted defendants’ separate motions to dismiss the amended complaint. Order affirmed, without costs. Plaintiffs, as taxpayers, seek a declaratory judgment and injunction with respect to certain violations of an order of the Water Resources Commission of the Department of Conservation. In our opinion, the court should not initially assume jurisdiction over the factual issues presented in the ease at bar, which require the special knowledge, experience, informed judgment and service of the Water Resources Commission and an interpretation of its own directives (Far East Conference v. United States, 342 U. S. 570). We are also of the opinion that the interests of justice and the promotion of proper relationships between the courts and administrative agencies would best be served if plaintiffs were initially relegated to a determination by the commission of the matter of the alleged violations of the commission’s order and to such remedial.and enforcement facilities as may be available to the commission, subject, however, to such judicial review and proceedings as any of the participants may thereafter be advised to initiate.

Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Brennan, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 561, 267 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-village-of-cornwall-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack