Legal Opinion
Town of Hempstead v. Goldblatt
New York Supreme Court
Decided July 13, 1959PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMario Pittoni, J.
The town sues to enjoin the defendants from mining and dredging a certain sand pit located on the east side of Newbridge Avenue in the East Meadow section of the town until the defendants obtain a permit required by Town Ordinance No. 16, and until violations of section 4 of that ordinance are cured.
The defendants in their answer claim res judicata, protection of the ex post facto, of the due process, and of the equal protection clauses of the Constitutions, and the motives of the town officials as defenses.
It appears that the subject property, hereinafter sometimes called the sand pit, is 38…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Yick Wo v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Snowden v. HughesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- West Coast Hotel Co. v. ParrishSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Hadacheck v. SebastianSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Goldblatt v. Town of HempsteadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Town of Southeast v. GonnellaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1966
- Maytum v. NelsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
- Moore v. National Distillers & Chemical Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1992
- Town of Hempstead v. GoldblattAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1959
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.