King v. Glass

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

King v. Glass

223 A.D.2d 708, 637 N.Y.S.2d 187, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 671

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

DecidedJanuary 29, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 223 A.D.2d 708 (King v. Glass) 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

King v. Glass, 223 A.D.2d 708, 637 N.Y.S.2d 187, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 671 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a policy of the Westchester County Department of Social Services concerning promotions and appointments within that department, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Carey, J.), entered November 16,1994, which dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

It is well settled that "[t]he function of the courts is to determine controversies between litigants * * * They do not give advisory opinions” (Matter of State Indus. Commn., 224 NY 13, 16). The courts should not resolve disputed legal issues unless the resolution would have an immediate, practical effect on the conduct of the parties (see, New York Pub. Interest Research Group v Carey, 42 NY2d 527, 530). Since the issue in this case does not present an actual controversy upon which relief could be granted and that would have an immediate, practical effect on the conduct of the parties, the petition was properly dismissed. Santucci, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a policy of the Westchester County Department of Social Services concerning promotions and appointments within that department, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Carey, J.), entered November 16,1994, which dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

It is well settled that "[t]he function of the courts is to determine controversies between litigants * * * They do not give advisory opinions” (Matter of State Indus. Commn., 224 NY 13, 16). The courts should not resolve disputed legal issues unless the resolution would have an immediate, practical effect on the conduct of the parties (see, New York Pub. Interest Research Group v Carey, 42 NY2d 527, 530). Since the issue in this case does not present an actual controversy upon which relief could be granted and that would have an immediate, practical effect on the conduct of the parties, the petition was properly dismissed. Santucci, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

223 A.D.2d 708, 637 N.Y.S.2d 187, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 671, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-glass-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack