Stokes v. Village of Wurtsboro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stokes v. Village of Wurtsboro

168 A.D.2d 701, 565 N.Y.S.2d 733, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14769

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

DecidedDecember 6, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 168 A.D.2d 701 (Stokes v. Village of Wurtsboro) 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

Stokes v. Village of Wurtsboro, 168 A.D.2d 701, 565 N.Y.S.2d 733, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14769 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeals (1) from an order and judgment of the Supreme Court (Bradley, J.), entered July 13, 1989 in Sullivan County, which, inter alia, in a combined action for declaratory judgment and proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, marked the matter as closed, and (2) from an order of said court, entered February 9, 1990 in Sullivan County, which denied petitioners’ motion for, inter alia, reargument.

Supreme Court properly determined that the issues raised by plaintiffs in their various applications for relief were moot insofar as they had already been decided by prior litigation. The court therefore correctly marked the matter as closed. The court also properly denied a subsequent motion by plaintiffs since they failed to allege any new facts or arguments meriting either renewal or reargument. Given this result, plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are irrelevant.

Order and judgment entered July 13, 1989 affirmed, without costs.

Order entered February 9, 1990 affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.

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

Appeals (1) from an order and judgment of the Supreme Court (Bradley, J.), entered July 13, 1989 in Sullivan County, which, inter alia, in a combined action for declaratory judgment and proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, marked the matter as closed, and (2) from an order of said court, entered February 9, 1990 in Sullivan County, which denied petitioners’ motion for, inter alia, reargument.

Supreme Court properly determined that the issues raised by plaintiffs in their various applications for relief were moot insofar as they had already been decided by prior litigation. The court therefore correctly marked the matter as closed. The court also properly denied a subsequent motion by plaintiffs since they failed to allege any new facts or arguments meriting either renewal or reargument. Given this result, plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are irrelevant.

Order and judgment entered July 13, 1989 affirmed, without costs.

Order entered February 9, 1990 affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 A.D.2d 701, 565 N.Y.S.2d 733, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stokes-v-village-of-wurtsboro-nyappdiv-1990.