McFerran v. Board of Education

New York Court of Appeals

McFerran v. Board of Education

380 N.E.2d 301, 45 N.Y.2d 729, 408 N.Y.S.2d 474, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2187

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 11, 1978

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 380 N.E.2d 301 (McFerran v. Board of Education) 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

McFerran v. Board of Education, 380 N.E.2d 301, 45 N.Y.2d 729, 408 N.Y.S.2d 474, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2187 (N.Y. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.

Having instituted an action in Federal court based on a distinct Federal cause of action, it was necessary for that court to determine the validity of the agreement which petitioner now attacks in this subsequent proceeding. That prior action fully embraced those claims which petitioner now seeks to litigate in the courts of this State and settled principles of res judicata bar petitioner from raising those matters here (Israel v Wood Dolson Co., 1 NY2d 116, 118; Schuylkill Fuel Corp. v Nieberg Realty Corp., 250 NY 304, 306-307; Stoner v Culligan, Inc., 32 AD2d 170, 171-172).

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.

Having instituted an action in Federal court based on a distinct Federal cause of action, it was necessary for that court to determine the validity of the agreement which petitioner now attacks in this subsequent proceeding. That prior action fully embraced those claims which petitioner now seeks to litigate in the courts of this State and settled principles of res judicata bar petitioner from raising those matters here (Israel v Wood Dolson Co., 1 NY2d 116, 118; Schuylkill Fuel Corp. v Nieberg Realty Corp., 250 NY 304, 306-307; Stoner v Culligan, Inc., 32 AD2d 170, 171-172).

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

380 N.E.2d 301, 45 N.Y.2d 729, 408 N.Y.S.2d 474, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcferran-v-board-of-education-ny-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack