Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta City of Rochester v. Chiarella 63 N.Y.2d 857

← Cases

City of Rochester v. Chiarella

63 N.Y.2d 857 Court N.Y. Decision date 1984-10-11 English

Contents

Majority

p. 857
City of Rochester, Respondent, v Angelo Chiarella et al., Respondents, and Stephen J. Sercu et al., Appellants.
Argued September 13, 1984;
decided October 11, 1984
p. 859
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Joseph A. Regan and Mary Jane Angelone for appellants.
Louis N. Kash, Corporation Counsel, for City of Rochester, respondent.
Kenneth A. Payment for subclass A2, respondents.
Edward H. Fox and Karl S. Essler for Angelo Chiarella, respondent.
Byron Johnson for subclass B, respondents.
Michael A. Rosenbloom for subclass C, respondents.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Order affirmed, without costs, for the reasons stated in the opinion by Justice John H. Doerr at the Appellate Division ( 98 AD2d 8 ) other than as it relates to the Statute of Limitations defense, that defense having been withdrawn. Question certified answered in the affirmative. We add that on this appeal the effect of the claims of nonprotestors on the right of protestors to full refund is not before us.

Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye.

Cases cited