Hayden v. Tallman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hayden v. Tallman

5 A.D.3d 1021, 773 N.Y.S.2d 324, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2867

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

DecidedMarch 19, 2004

DocketAppeal No. 1

StatusPublished

This text of 5 A.D.3d 1021 (Hayden v. Tallman) 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

Hayden v. Tallman, 5 A.D.3d 1021, 773 N.Y.S.2d 324, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2867 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Edward A. Rath, Jr., J.), entered November 15, 2002. The judgment declared, after a hearing, that the parcel at issue is a public park.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: We affirm for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court. We note, however, that petitioners were only required to establish their entitlement to the relief sought by a preponderance of the evidence and not, as respondents contend, by clear and convincing evidence. Present—Green, J.P., Hurlbutt, Gorski, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.

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

Appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Edward A. Rath, Jr., J.), entered November 15, 2002. The judgment declared, after a hearing, that the parcel at issue is a public park.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: We affirm for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court. We note, however, that petitioners were only required to establish their entitlement to the relief sought by a preponderance of the evidence and not, as respondents contend, by clear and convincing evidence. Present—Green, J.P., Hurlbutt, Gorski, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.3d 1021, 773 N.Y.S.2d 324, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2867, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hayden-v-tallman-nyappdiv-2004.