Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Peluso v. Erie County Independence Party 13 N.Y.3d 139

← Cases

Peluso v. Erie County Independence Party

13 N.Y.3d 139 Court N.Y. Decision date 2009-08-26 English

Contents

Majority

p. 139
[914 NE2d 1003, 886 NYS2d 86]
In the Matter of Anthony Peluso et al., Appellants, v Erie County Independence Party et al., Respondents, and New York State Committee of the Independence Party et al., Appellants, et al., Respondents.
Argued August 25, 2009;
decided August 26, 2009
p. 140
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
John Ciampoli, Albany, for appellants.
Jerome D. Schad, Williamsville, Cantor, Lukasik, Dolce, Panepinto, Buffalo (Sean Cooney of counsel), and Cheryl A. Green, County Attorney (.Kristin Klein Wheaton of counsel), for respondents.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Petitioners brought this proceeding pursuant to the Election Law, the General Associations Law and CPLR article 78, seeking, among other things, a declaration that respondent Erie County Committee of the Independence Party’s rules are invalid and contrary to the rules of the State Committee of the Independence Party, as well as an injunction. The State Committee cross-petitioned, joining in petitioners’ request for declaratory relief.

The Appellate Division erred in granting summary judgment on the ground that the declaration sought is an advisory opinion ( 65 AD3d 820 [2009]). A declaratory judgment action is an appropriate vehicle to establish and promulgate the rights of parties on a particular subject matter, including determining the parties’ rights under state and local party rules (see e.g. Matter of Conroy v State Comm, of Independence Party of NY., 10 NY3d 896 [2008]).

Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the case remitted to that court for consideration of issues raised but not determined on the appeal.

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur in per curiam opinion.

Order reversed, etc.

Cases cited