Legal Opinion

Pacific Salmon Unlimited v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

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

Decided February 23, 1995PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

*243OPINION OF THE COURT

Casey, J.

When Pacific salmon were initially introduced into Lakes Ontario and Erie, it was believed that the species would not take a lure during their migration within tributaries of the lakes and that the fish were destined to die after spawning. Accordingly, respondent State Department of Environmental Conservation (hereinafter the Department) allowed the practice of snatching* with respect to the salmon. When experience, research and tests demonstrated that this belief was erroneous and that Pacific salmon, in a migrating state, would come to a lure if undisturbed, the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Flacke v. Onondaga Landfill Systems, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. Mercy Hospital v. New York State Department of Social ServicesNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. Binghamton-Johnson City Joint Sewage Board v. New York State Department of Environmental ConservationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  4. Gasda, Ltd. v. AdduciAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Medical Society of the State of New York, Inc. v. LevinNew York Supreme Court · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API