Burkhart v. Town of Ontario

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Burkhart v. Town of Ontario

105 A.D.2d 1056, 482 N.Y.S.2d 596, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21130

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

DecidedNovember 7, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 105 A.D.2d 1056 (Burkhart v. Town of Ontario) 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

Burkhart v. Town of Ontario, 105 A.D.2d 1056, 482 N.Y.S.2d 596, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21130 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed against defendant town. Memorandum: Special Term erred in denying summary judgment to the Town of Ontario. In enacting the ordinance, the town was acting in a legislative capacity. As such, it has immunity which rests upon a regard for sound principles of government (see B & J Investors Corp. v Town Bd., 56 AD2d 882). “We know of no principle of law under which the state becomes liable because of the adoption of an unconstitutional statute.” (Barrett v State of New York, 220 NY 423, 429-430.) (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Wayne County, Rosenbloom, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Boomer and Moule, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed, without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed against defendant town. Memorandum: Special Term erred in denying summary judgment to the Town of Ontario. In enacting the ordinance, the town was acting in a legislative capacity. As such, it has immunity which rests upon a regard for sound principles of government (see B & J Investors Corp. v Town Bd., 56 AD2d 882). “We know of no principle of law under which the state becomes liable because of the adoption of an unconstitutional statute.” (Barrett v State of New York, 220 NY 423, 429-430.) (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Wayne County, Rosenbloom, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Boomer and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 A.D.2d 1056, 482 N.Y.S.2d 596, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burkhart-v-town-of-ontario-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack