In re Village of Hewlett Harbor v. County of Nassau

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Village of Hewlett Harbor v. County of Nassau

272 A.D.2d 1065

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 10, 1947·Published

Opinion

Proceeding brought pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to annul determination whereby a sewage disposal plant will be located on a designated site, with discharge of effluent therefrom into an adjoining creek. Order dismissing petition unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The right of review afforded by section 1229 of the Nassau County Government Law (L. 1936, ch. 879, as amd. by L. 1945, ch. 897) does not relate to acts of legislative nature, as to which the legislative body has absolute discretion (People ex rel. O’Connor v. Supervisors, 153 N. Y. 370; People ex rel. North v. Featherstonhaugh, 172 N. Y. 112; People ex rel. Trustees of Vil. of Jamaica v. Bd. of Suprs. of Queens Co., 131 N. Y. 468; Matter of Neddo v. Schrade, 270 N. Y. '97; Matter of Long Island B. B. Go. v. Hylan, 240 N. Y. 199), but is limited to consideration of compliance with procedural requirements. (People ex rel. Sagerty V. McClellan, 107 App. Div. 272; People ex rel. Mershon v. Shave, 34 App. Div. 61.) Furthermore, this proceeding was not brought in time to review the 1945 resolution. As to the 1946 determination, there is no claim of lack of compliance with procedural requirements. Present — Hagarty, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ.; Nolan, J., not voting.

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

Proceeding brought pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to annul determination whereby a sewage disposal plant will be located on a designated site, with discharge of effluent therefrom into an adjoining creek. Order dismissing petition unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The right of review afforded by section 1229 of the Nassau County Government Law (L. 1936, ch. 879, as amd. by L. 1945, ch. 897) does not relate to acts of legislative nature, as to which the legislative body has absolute discretion (People ex rel. O’Connor v. Supervisors, 153 N. Y. 370; People ex rel. North v. Featherstonhaugh, 172 N. Y. 112; People ex rel. Trustees of Vil. of Jamaica v. Bd. of Suprs. of Queens Co., 131 N. Y. 468; Matter of Neddo v. Schrade, 270 N. Y. '97; Matter of Long Island B. B. Go. v. Hylan, 240 N. Y. 199), but is limited to consideration of compliance with procedural requirements. (People ex rel. Sagerty V. McClellan, 107 App. Div. 272; People ex rel. Mershon v. Shave, 34 App. Div. 61.) Furthermore, this proceeding was not brought in time to review the 1945 resolution. As to the 1946 determination, there is no claim of lack of compliance with procedural requirements. Present — Hagarty, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ.; Nolan, J., not voting.

In re Village of Hewlett Harbor v. County of Nassau, 272 A.D.2d 1065 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1947).

Pincite

272 A.D.2d 1065 (In re Village of Hewlett Harbor v. County of Nassau) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related