Froehlich v. Toia

71 A.D.2d 824, 419 N.Y.S.2d 386, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13054
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 13, 1979
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 71 A.D.2d 824 (Froehlich v. Toia) 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
Froehlich v. Toia, 71 A.D.2d 824, 419 N.Y.S.2d 386, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13054 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner and interveners brought this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to review a determination of respondent State Commissioner of Social Services which denied retroactive effect to a Court of Appeals determination in Matter of Dumbleton v Reed (40 NY2d 586). Petitioners appeal only from that part of the judgment at Special Term that denied their motion that the proceeding be maintained as a class action. Class action certification is a question vested in the sound discretion of the court (CPLR 901, subd a, par 5; Matter of Shook v Lavine, 49 AD2d 238; Siegel, New York Practice, §§ 141, 142). The fact that this proceeding involved a governmental operation does not, standing alone, bar a class action (Matter of Knapp v Michaux, 55 AD2d 1025). Where, as here, there is no common question of law to be determined, but only the facts of each individual’s circumstances to be examined sepa[825]*825rately, no economy of judicial time is gained by granting class action certification. Further, such relief is unnecessary since the respondent has acquiesced in the decision and subsequent petitioners are adequately protected by the principle of stare decisis (Matter of Dumbleton v Reed, supra; Matter of Martin v Lavine, 39 NY2d 72). Where class action status is not obtained in a proceeding under CPLR article 9, attorneys’ fees may not be awarded (CPLR 909). (Appeal from judgment of Steuben Supreme Court— art 78.) Present—Cardamone, J. P., Hancock, Jr., Schnepp, Doerr and Witmer, JJ.

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

Related

Matter of Coordinated Tit. Ins. Cases
2004 NY Slip Op 50171(U) (New York Supreme Court, Nassau County, 2004)
Mahoney v. Pataki
261 A.D.2d 898 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Conrad v. Hackett
149 Misc. 2d 56 (New York Supreme Court, 1990)
Woodrow v. Colt Industries, Inc.
155 A.D.2d 154 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
Davis v. Perales
151 A.D.2d 749 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Heights 75 Owners Corp. v. Thurman
134 A.D.2d 484 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)
Christensen v. Kiewit-Murdock Investment Corp.
815 F.2d 206 (Second Circuit, 1987)
Christensen v. Kiewit-Murdock Investment Corporation
815 F.2d 206 (Second Circuit, 1987)
Askey v. Occidental Chemical Corp.
102 A.D.2d 130 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Cunningham v. Frucher
110 Misc. 2d 458 (New York Supreme Court, 1981)
Friar v. Vanguard Holding Corp.
78 A.D.2d 83 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)
Cannon v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States
106 Misc. 2d 1060 (New York Supreme Court, 1980)
Marthen v. Evans
104 Misc. 2d 553 (New York Supreme Court, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
71 A.D.2d 824, 419 N.Y.S.2d 386, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13054, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/froehlich-v-toia-nyappdiv-1979.