Honig v. BD. OF SUPERVISORS OF RENSSELAER COUNTY
This text of 248 N.E.2d 922 (Honig v. BD. OF SUPERVISORS OF RENSSELAER COUNTY) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Nedda R. Honig, on Behalf of Herself and All Other Residents of the County of Rensselaer, Similarly Situated, Respondent,
v.
Board of Supervisors of Rensselaer County et al., Respondents, and Joseph G. Manupella, Intervenor-Appellant.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
Marvin I. Honig for plaintiff-respondent.
Thomas V. Kenney, Philip J. Landry, Jr., and Edward M. Murray for intervenor-appellant.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (Robert W. Imrie and William A. Carero of counsel), for State of New York, respondent.
James T. Ronan, County Attorney, for Board of Supervisors of Rensselaer County, respondent.
Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL and JASEN. Taking no part: Judge KEATING.
Order affirmed, without costs, on the opinion at the Appellate Division. We but repeat that court's admonition that the County Board of Supervisors to be chosen at the coming (1969) election proceed as promptly as circumstances permit to promulgate a plan of reapportionment (for use in future elections) meeting constitutional standards (Wells v. Rockefeller, 394 U. S. 542, 547).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
248 N.E.2d 922, 24 N.Y.2d 861, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/honig-v-bd-of-supervisors-of-rensselaer-county-ny-1969.