Hinman v. City of Rochester

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hinman v. City of Rochester

94 A.D.2d 950, 463 N.Y.S.2d 741, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18426

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

DecidedMay 25, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 94 A.D.2d 950 (Hinman v. City of Rochester) 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

Hinman v. City of Rochester, 94 A.D.2d 950, 463 N.Y.S.2d 741, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18426 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

. Appeal and cross appeal unanimously dismissed, without costs (see CPLR 5701, subd [b], par 1). Memorandum: We note merely that had the parties sought leave to appeal, such relief would have been denied. That portion of the CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the constitutionality of the parking ordinance was properly converted to an action for declaratory judgment (CPLR 103, subd [c]; Press v County of Monroe, 50 NY2d 695). The language in Special Term’s order regarding dismissal of petitioner’s “prayers for relief” does not constitute dismissal of his causes of action. (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Boehm, J. — dismiss action.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Schnepp, JJ.

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

. Appeal and cross appeal unanimously dismissed, without costs (see CPLR 5701, subd [b], par 1). Memorandum: We note merely that had the parties sought leave to appeal, such relief would have been denied. That portion of the CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the constitutionality of the parking ordinance was properly converted to an action for declaratory judgment (CPLR 103, subd [c]; Press v County of Monroe, 50 NY2d 695). The language in Special Term’s order regarding dismissal of petitioner’s “prayers for relief” does not constitute dismissal of his causes of action. (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Boehm, J. — dismiss action.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Schnepp, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 A.D.2d 950, 463 N.Y.S.2d 741, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18426, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hinman-v-city-of-rochester-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack