Honig v. BD. OF SUPERVISORS OF RENSSELAER COUNTY

248 N.E.2d 922, 24 N.Y.2d 861
New York Court of Appeals·Decided April 16, 1969·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

24 N.Y.2d 861 (1969)

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.

Argued April 7, 1969.
Decided April 16, 1969.

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

Honig v. BD. OF SUPERVISORS OF RENSSELAER COUNTY, 248 N.E.2d 922, 24 N.Y.2d 861 (N.Y. 1969).

248 N.E.2d 922 (Honig v. BD. OF SUPERVISORS OF RENSSELAER COUNTY) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of Hoffmann v. New York State Ind. Redistricting Commission
217 A.D.3d 53 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
Matter of Nichols v. Hochul
2022 NY Slip Op 03809 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)