Matter of Tommy & Tina, Inc. v. Dep't of Consum. Affairs of the City of New York, 464 N.E.2d 988 (NY 1984). · Go Syfert
Search
Matter of Tommy & Tina, Inc. v. Dep't of Consum. Affairs of the City of New York, 464 N.E.2d 988 (NY 1984). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
39 citation events (23 in the last 25 years) across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Matter of Rossi v. New York City Dept. of Parks & Recreation (nyappdiv, 2015-04-09)
Treatment trajectory · 1984 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1984 2005 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Matter of Rossi v. New York City Dept. of Parks & Recreation (2×)
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
“It is well settled that the construction given statutes and regulations by the agency responsible for their administration, if not irrational or unreasonable, should be upheld” (Matter of Howard v Wyman, 28 NY2d at 438 [1971]; see Matter of Tommy & Tina, Inc. v Department of Consumer Affairs of City of N.Y., 95 AD2d 724 [1st Dept 1983], affd for reasons stated below 62 NY2d 671 [1984]).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Building Trades Employers' Educational Ass'n v. McGowan
2d Cir. · 2002 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Tommy & Tina, Inc. v. Dep’t of Consumer Affairs, 95 A.D.2d 724, 724 , 464 N.Y.S.2d 132 (1st Dep’t 1983), aff'd, 62 N.Y.2d 671, 476 .
cited Cited "see, e.g." Building Trades Employers' Educational Association v. Mcgowan
2d Cir. · 2002 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Tommy & Tina, Inc. v. Dep't of Consumer Affairs, 95 A.D.2d 724, 724 , 464 N.Y.S.2d 132 (1st Dep't 1983), aff'd, 62 N.Y.2d 671 , 476 N.Y.S.2d 290 , 464 N.E.2d 988 (1984).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." American Amusement MacHine Ass'n v. Kendrick
S.D. Ind. · 2000 · signal: see also · confidence low
The court cautioned: “We recognize that in the future video games which contain sufficient communicative and expressive elements may be created.” Marshfield Family Skateland, 450 N.E.2d at 609-10 ; see also Tommy & Tina Inc. v. Department of Consumer Affairs, 117 Misc.2d 415 , 459 N.Y.S.2d 220, 226-27 (N.Y.Sup.Ct.1983) (finding that video games considered in the case were not speech but leaving open the possibility that “games ... of a different nature” may be entitled to First Amendment protection), aff'd, 95 A.D.2d 724 , 464 N.Y.S.2d 132 (N.Y.App.Div.1983), aff'd mem., 62 N.Y.2d 671 …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Tommy and Tina, Inc., Et Al., Appellants,
v.
Department of Consumer Affairs of the City of New York, Respondent
New York Court of Appeals.
May 1, 1984.
464 N.E.2d 988
Ronald S. Koppelman for appellants., Frederick A. O. Schwarz, Jr., Corporation Counsel {Joan E. Handler and Francis F. Caputo of counsel), for respondent.
Cooke, Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons, Kaye.
Cited by 35 opinions  |  Published

OPINION OF THE COURT

Order affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated in the memorandum of the Appellate Division (95 AD2d 724).

Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye.