Young v. Morris

14 A.D.2d 523, 218 N.Y.S.2d 257, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9575
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 6, 1961·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Under the circumstances, the respondent Commissioner’s absolute denial of the permit without specification of alternative suitable location or date was improper. (See Matter of Rockwell v. Morris, 12 A D 2d 272, affd. 10 N Y 2d 721.) The respondent Commissioner has, however, indicated his willingness to issue a permit to the petitioner-appellant and his group in accordance with the provisions of the City Charter and the Rules and Regulations of the Park Department. On the record here, we are satisfied as to respondent’s good faith and, in view of our full consideration and construction of the Charter and Rule provisions in Matter of Rockwell v. Morris (supra) we do not deem it necessary or proper that we should spell out in detail the duties of the respondent. Concur — Rabin, J. P., Stevens, Eager and Steuer, JJ.

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

Young v. Morris, 14 A.D.2d 523, 218 N.Y.S.2d 257, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9575 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

14 A.D.2d 523 (Young v. Morris) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc. v. Lang
91 Misc. 2d 421 (New York Supreme Court, 1977)