Ferdon v. Rogers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ferdon v. Rogers

23 A.D.2d 851, 259 N.Y.S.2d 187, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4318

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

DecidedMay 3, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 23 A.D.2d 851 (Ferdon v. Rogers) 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

Ferdon v. Rogers, 23 A.D.2d 851, 259 N.Y.S.2d 187, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4318 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding under article 78 of the CPLR to require the Board of Trustees of the Village of Searsdale to submit Local Law No. 1 of 1963 to the electors of the village for a referendum pursuant to former sections 16 and 17 of the Village Home Rule Law or, in the alternative, to declare unconstitutional said local law and the statute (L. 1963, eh. 897) under which it was adopted, the petitioners appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered August 12, 1964, which denied their petition and dismissed the proceeding. Judgment affirmed, without costs. The local law was not subject to referendum because the discontinuance as park land of Lot 14 in Block 4 of Section 2 on the Tax Assessment Map of the Village (as provided in the local law) did not constitute an alienation or leasing of village property within the meaning of subdivision 6 of former section 17 of the Village Home Rule Law. The enabling legislation (L. 1963, eh. 897) and the local law are valid and constitutional. Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Hill, Ralbin and Benjamin, JJ., concur. [43 Misc 2d 676.]

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

In a proceeding under article 78 of the CPLR to require the Board of Trustees of the Village of Searsdale to submit Local Law No. 1 of 1963 to the electors of the village for a referendum pursuant to former sections 16 and 17 of the Village Home Rule Law or, in the alternative, to declare unconstitutional said local law and the statute (L. 1963, eh. 897) under which it was adopted, the petitioners appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered August 12, 1964, which denied their petition and dismissed the proceeding. Judgment affirmed, without costs. The local law was not subject to referendum because the discontinuance as park land of Lot 14 in Block 4 of Section 2 on the Tax Assessment Map of the Village (as provided in the local law) did not constitute an alienation or leasing of village property within the meaning of subdivision 6 of former section 17 of the Village Home Rule Law. The enabling legislation (L. 1963, eh. 897) and the local law are valid and constitutional. Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Hill, Ralbin and Benjamin, JJ., concur. [43 Misc 2d 676.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 851, 259 N.Y.S.2d 187, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4318, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ferdon-v-rogers-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack