Brown v. Coughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brown v. Coughlin

210 A.D.2d 1006, 621 N.Y.S.2d 980

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

DecidedDecember 23, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 210 A.D.2d 1006 (Brown v. Coughlin) 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

Brown v. Coughlin, 210 A.D.2d 1006, 621 N.Y.S.2d 980 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously vacated in part, determination confirmed, petition dismissed and judgment otherwise affirmed in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court should have transferred this CPLR article 78 proceeding to this Court because it presented a substantial evidence issue (see, Matter of Benesch v Village of Clayton, 185 AD2d 688, Iv denied 81 NY2d 702), and thus we vacate that part of the judgment. Upon our de novo review of that issue, we conclude that the determination should be confirmed. The remaining issues were properly considered and found by the court to be lacking in merit, and thus we affirm that part of the judgment. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Corning, J.—Article 78.) Present— Pine, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Wesley and Davis, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously vacated in part, determination confirmed, petition dismissed and judgment otherwise affirmed in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court should have transferred this CPLR article 78 proceeding to this Court because it presented a substantial evidence issue (see, Matter of Benesch v Village of Clayton, 185 AD2d 688, Iv denied 81 NY2d 702), and thus we vacate that part of the judgment. Upon our de novo review of that issue, we conclude that the determination should be confirmed. The remaining issues were properly considered and found by the court to be lacking in merit, and thus we affirm that part of the judgment. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Corning, J.—Article 78.) Present— Pine, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Wesley and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

210 A.D.2d 1006, 621 N.Y.S.2d 980, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-coughlin-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack