Legal Opinion
MATTER OF MERSON v. McNally
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 30, 1997PublishedCited by 76 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Smith, J.
We hold that, under certain circumstances, a negative declaration may be issued under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) even where the project — a Type I action — has been modified during the initial review process to accommodate environmental concerns of the lead agency and other interested parties.
In the first case, Matter of Merson v McNally, we conclude that the modifications made to the project in response to environmental concerns raised during the Planning Board’s review, were a legitimate product of the process and did not implicitly…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Jackson v. New York State Urban Development Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Akpan v. KochNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Gernatt Asphalt Products, Inc. v. Town of SardiniaNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- Chinese Staff & Workers Ass'n v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Ass'n v. JorlingNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by76 opinions
- Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Planning BoardNew York Court of Appeals · 2007
- New York City Coalition to End Lead Poisoning, Inc. v. ValloneNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
- Gordon v. RushNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
- Lucas v. Planning Bd. of Town of LaGrangeDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
- City Council of Watervliet v. Town Board of ColonieNew York Court of Appeals · 2004
71 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.