Strongin v. Nyquist

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Strongin v. Nyquist

57 A.D.2d 638, 392 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11664

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

DecidedApril 1, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 57 A.D.2d 638 (Strongin v. Nyquist) 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

Strongin v. Nyquist, 57 A.D.2d 638, 392 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11664 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion for clarification of decision dated November 10, 1976 (54 AD2d 1031) granted, without costs, and decretal paragraph of decision amended to read as follows: "Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by annulling so much of the determination as found petitioner guilty of charge II and by reducing the penalty to a suspension of six months without pay, and matter remitted to Special Term for a determination, under relevant rules, of the amount petitioner is to be paid in back salary from the date of her suspension to the date of reinstatement, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs.” The issues raised by respondents on this motion regarding petitioner’s obligation to minimize her damages and her alleged delay in prosecuting the appeal should also be presented to and determined by Special Term upon the remittitur. Koreman, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Mahoney and Larkin, JJ., concur.

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

Motion for clarification of decision dated November 10, 1976 (54 AD2d 1031) granted, without costs, and decretal paragraph of decision amended to read as follows: "Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by annulling so much of the determination as found petitioner guilty of charge II and by reducing the penalty to a suspension of six months without pay, and matter remitted to Special Term for a determination, under relevant rules, of the amount petitioner is to be paid in back salary from the date of her suspension to the date of reinstatement, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs.” The issues raised by respondents on this motion regarding petitioner’s obligation to minimize her damages and her alleged delay in prosecuting the appeal should also be presented to and determined by Special Term upon the remittitur. Koreman, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Mahoney and Larkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 A.D.2d 638, 392 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11664, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/strongin-v-nyquist-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack