Legal Opinion
Seaman v. Fedourich
New York Supreme Court
Decided July 22, 1965PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRobert W. Sloan, J.
The plaintiffs’ motion seeks, in effect, an amendment of the judgment which found the existing method of apportionment of the Common Council of the City of Binghamton in violation of the Federal and New York State Constitutions, and directed that “no election of Councilmen shall hereafter be had pursuant to the existing or any other unconstitutional apportionment plan;”. (Seaman v. Fedourich, 45 Misc 2d 940.) An abortive effort was made to comply (Seaman v. Fedourich, 46 Misc 2d 289, affd. 23 A D 2d 968, affd. 16 N Y 2d 94), and insufficient time remains to submit and adopt a constitutionally…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Matter of Sherrill v. . O'BrienNew York Court of Appeals · 1907
- Shilbury v. Board of SupervisorsNew York Supreme Court · 1965
- Thigpen v. MeyersDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1964
- Seaman v. FedourichNew York Supreme Court · 1965
- Seaman v. FedourichNew York Supreme Court · 1965
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Bianchi v. GriffingDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1966
- Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. CayetanoHawaii Supreme Court · 2000
- Franklin v. KrauseNew York Supreme Court · 1972
- Morris v. Board of Supervisors of Herkimer CountyNew York Supreme Court · 1966
- Lodico v. Board of SupervisorsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1966
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.