MATTER OF BARNES v. La Vallee

New York Court of Appeals

MATTER OF BARNES v. La Vallee

349 N.E.2d 866, 39 N.Y.2d 721, 384 N.Y.S.2d 766, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2688

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 6, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 349 N.E.2d 866 (MATTER OF BARNES v. La Vallee) 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.

Bluebook

MATTER OF BARNES v. La Vallee, 349 N.E.2d 866, 39 N.Y.2d 721, 384 N.Y.S.2d 766, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2688 (N.Y. 1976).

Pincite

Opinions

Memorandum. Orders in both proceedings are affirmed, without costs. Despite able and earnest presentations by counsel (assigned by this court) in each proceeding, the fact remains that the initiating petitions are legally insufficient. Among other things, they fail to allege facts to establish the preconditions to the relief requested. Moreover, the gravamen in each petition is too general, vague, and insufficient to permit the court to consider other than abstract questions [723]*723about an inadequately described or identified "religion” and its purported requirements, or the "literature” which concededly refers to a poster not before this court as a part of the record. This protracted and futile litigation should never have proceeded this far through three levels of courts. On the other hand, petitioner is an imprisoned and a more or less incoherent, indigent litigant who should have received better assistance at the nisi prius level. The disposition is without prejudice to the making of new applications to the Supreme Court of jurisdiction which should assign counsel to restate, if necessary, and prosecute the applications on behalf of petitioner. Then, as appropriate, on notice to proper parties, the court should promptly resolve the issues raised, if any, and grant such relief, if any, as may be indicated.

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

Memorandum. Orders in both proceedings are affirmed, without costs. Despite able and earnest presentations by counsel (assigned by this court) in each proceeding, the fact remains that the initiating petitions are legally insufficient. Among other things, they fail to allege facts to establish the preconditions to the relief requested. Moreover, the gravamen in each petition is too general, vague, and insufficient to permit the court to consider other than abstract questions [723]*723about an inadequately described or identified "religion” and its purported requirements, or the "literature” which concededly refers to a poster not before this court as a part of the record. This protracted and futile litigation should never have proceeded this far through three levels of courts. On the other hand, petitioner is an imprisoned and a more or less incoherent, indigent litigant who should have received better assistance at the nisi prius level. The disposition is without prejudice to the making of new applications to the Supreme Court of jurisdiction which should assign counsel to restate, if necessary, and prosecute the applications on behalf of petitioner. Then, as appropriate, on notice to proper parties, the court should promptly resolve the issues raised, if any, and grant such relief, if any, as may be indicated.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

349 N.E.2d 866, 39 N.Y.2d 721, 384 N.Y.S.2d 766, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2688, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-barnes-v-la-vallee-ny-1976.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack