Legal Opinion
MATTER OF HENRY v. Noto
New York Court of Appeals
Decided May 29, 1980PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum;
The order of the Appellate Division should be modified, without costs, in accordance with this memorandum and, as so modified, affirmed.
The Suffolk County District Attorney, Patrick Henry, and two senior assistants, Newell and Me Vann, challenge certain action taken by the Suffolk County Legislature. Henry challenges Resolution No. 1070-1970 ("1070”), which empowers the county executive and presiding officer to approve or disapprove a request to fill any position earmarked by the director of the budget. All three plaintiffs challenge Resolution No. 919-1977…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- County of Oneida v. BerleNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Gallagher v. ReganNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Nevins, Inc. v. KasmachNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
- People Ex Rel. O'Connor v. . GirvinNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Matter of Croker v. . SturgisNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Slominski v. RutkowskiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Davis Construction Corp. v. County of SuffolkNew York Supreme Court · 1982
- Slominski v. RutkowskiNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Suffolk County Ass'n of Municipal Employees, Inc. v. County of SuffolkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Joyce v. OrtizAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.