Suffolk Hous. Servs. v. Town of Brookhaven, 403 N.E.2d 458 (NY 1980). · Go Syfert
Suffolk Hous. Servs. v. Town of Brookhaven, 403 N.E.2d 458 (NY 1980). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
25 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: In Re Benjamin (dc, 1997-07-31)
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980 2003 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" In Re Benjamin
D.C. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See id. at 553, 453 N.E.2d at 498, 466 N.Y.S.2d at 269 (discussing In re Sutton, 49 N.Y.2d 799 , 403 N.E.2d 467 , 426 N.Y.S.2d 1030 (1980)); see also In re Friedman, supra note 6, 196 A.D.2d at 293-95, 609 N.Y.S.2d at 586.
discussed Cited "see" Derleth v. Naughton
NY · 1981 · signal: see · confidence high
Motions to dismiss the appeal granted and the appeal dismissed, with one bill of costs and $20 costs of motion, upon the ground that the dissent at the Appellate Division is not on a question of law (CPLR 5601, subd [a], par [i]; see Williams v City of Buffalo, 49 NY2d 799 ).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Terry v. Town of Huntington
N.Y. App. Div. · 1984 · signal: see also · confidence low
H As this court has very recently stated, a class action against governmental bodies and agencies is generally not the superior method for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy (CPLR 901, subd a, par 5), since any determination would, by virtue of the principle of stare decisis, be binding on the governmental body and automatically benefit all persons in the class claimed to be represented regardless of whether they were made plaintiffs in the action through the vehicle of a class action (see Oak Beach v Town of Babylon, 100 AD2d 930 ; see, also, Suffolk Housing Seros, v Town …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Suffolk Housing Services
v.
Town of Brookhaven
New York Court of Appeals.
Feb 20, 1980.
403 N.E.2d 458
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published

Motion to dismiss the appeal herein granted and the appeal dismissed, with costs and $20 costs of motion, upon the ground that the question certified does not present a question of law decisive of the correctness of the determination of the Appellate Division.