Harris v. Fahle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Harris v. Fahle

119 A.D.2d 630, 500 N.Y.S.2d 784, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55557

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 14, 1986·Published

Opinion

— In an action for injunctive relief, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mclnerney, J.), dated January 16, 1985, which, upon the plaintiffs’ motion, authorized them or their agents to enter upon the defendants’ premises and remove 16 dogs and lodge them in an animal shelter for 30 days.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Special Term did not abuse its discretion in granting the plaintiffs relief since the determination of the Commissioner of the Department of Health Services of the County of Suffolk ordering the abatement of the public nuisance (see, Fahle v County of Suffolk, 119 AD2d 628) was not completely complied with. The Commissioner and his agents were authorized by statute to enter the defendants’ property and remove the dogs, so as to abate the nuisance caused by these dogs on the property, resulting from, inter alia, the inadequate sanitary facilities for them (Public Health Law § 1305). Weinstein, J. P., Rubin, Fiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action for injunctive relief, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mclnerney, J.), dated January 16, 1985, which, upon the plaintiffs’ motion, authorized them or their agents to enter upon the defendants’ premises and remove 16 dogs and lodge them in an animal shelter for 30 days.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Special Term did not abuse its discretion in granting the plaintiffs relief since the determination of the Commissioner of the Department of Health Services of the County of Suffolk ordering the abatement of the public nuisance (see, Fahle v County of Suffolk, 119 AD2d 628) was not completely complied with. The Commissioner and his agents were authorized by statute to enter the defendants’ property and remove the dogs, so as to abate the nuisance caused by these dogs on the property, resulting from, inter alia, the inadequate sanitary facilities for them (Public Health Law § 1305). Weinstein, J. P., Rubin, Fiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Harris v. Fahle, 119 A.D.2d 630, 500 N.Y.S.2d 784, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55557 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

119 A.D.2d 630 (Harris v. Fahle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related