11 New York opinions name it 3 courts 1957–2023 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Frew Run Gravel Products, Inc. v. Town of Carrollgreen2 sentences2023In Matter of Frew Ran Gravel Prods., Inc. v Town of Carroll, we held that the MLRL’s supersession clause does not prevent a municipality from prohibiting mining through its zoning ordinances ( 71 NY2d 126, 133-134 [1987]). 2021In Matter of Frew Run Gravel Prods. v Town of Carroll ( 71 NY2d 126 [1987]), the Court of Appeals clarified the applicability of this supersession clause and differentiated between local laws pertaining to the actual operation and process of mining, which were subject to the clause, and other local laws, which fell outside its preemptive orbit. | 1 | 8 |
Gernatt Asphalt Products, Inc. v. Town of Sardiniagreen2 sentences2014A mining company challenged the zoning law under the MLRL’s supersession clause and, in an argument mirroring the one advanced by Norse and CHC, asserted that Frew Run left “municipalities with the limited authority to determine in which zoning districts mining may be conducted but not the authority to prohibit mining in all zoning districts” (Gernatt, 87 NY2d at 681 ). 2012The Court of Appeals decision in Matter of Gernatt Asphalt Prods. v Town of Sardinia ( 87 NY2d 668, 681-682 [1996]) confirmed the Frew Run holding that the supersession clause of the MLRL drew a distinction between the manner and method of mining and local land use regulations: “Zoning ordinances, we noted, have the purpose of regulating land use generally. | 1 | 2 |
Matter of Benvenga v. La Guardiagreen2 sentences2022Perhaps that is because, as plaintiffs have acknowledged since the outset of this action, “the Legislature may delegate judicial compensation decisions.” In making that concession before Supreme Court, plaintiffs cited this Court’s decision in Matter of Benvenga v LaGuardia ( 294 NY 526, 533 [1945]), and correctly acknowledged “that was the understanding for almost [100] years” prior to the amendment of article III, section 6 to provide that legislative compensation shall “be fixed by law.” In any event, the facts of Larabee and our statements therein, like those of the other judicial pay case 2022In determining when supersession 11 Inasmuch as the narrow scope of the enabling act is consistent with our prior instruction regarding the use of supersession to effectuate prospective judicial pay raises (see Benvenga, 294 NY at 530-531 ), we have no occasion to adopt a comprehensive test for determining when the enabling act of a temporary commission that provides for the supersession of certain terms in pre-existing statutes has crossed the line into an unconstitutional attempt to pass onto other bodies “powers inherently and exclusively legislative” (Trustees of Vil. of Saratoga Springs, | 1 | 1 |
People v. Oceanside Institutional Industries, Inc.green1 sentence2022Indus., Inc., 15 Misc 3d 22, 25 [App Term, 9th and 10th Jud Dists 2007] [enforcing a supersession clause]; Sowa v Zabar, 67 Misc 3d 1237[A] , 2020 NY Slip Op 50772[U] [Sup Ct, NY County 2020] [same]). | 1 | 1 |
DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Spitzergreen1 sentence2014And because the text of a statutory provision “is the clearest indicator of legislative intent” (Matter of DaimlerChrysler Corp. v Spitzer, 7 NY3d 653, 660 [2006]), this factor is most important. | 1 | 1 |
Price v. Pricegreen1 sentence1987To find the answer, we look to the plain meaning of the phrase "relating to the extractive mining industry” as one part of the entire Mined Land Reclamation Law, to the relevant legislative history, and to the underlying purposes of the supersession clause as part of the statutory scheme (see, People v Hedgeman, 70 NY2d 533, 537 ; Price v Price, 69 NY2d 8, 13, 14 ). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Trustees of the Village of Saratoga Springs v. Saratoga Gas, Electric Light & Power Co.
green
1 sentence2022In determining when supersession 11 Inasmuch as the narrow scope of the enabling act is consistent with our prior instruction regarding the use of supersession to effectuate prospective judicial pay raises (see Benvenga, 294 NY at 530-531 ), we have no occasion to adopt a comprehensive test for determining when the enabling act of a temporary commission that provides for the supersession of certain terms in pre-existing statutes has crossed the line into an unconstitutional attempt to pass onto other bodies “powers inherently and exclusively legislative” (Trustees of Vil. of Saratoga Springs, | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Larabee v. Governor of New York
green
1 sentence2022In Larabee, we explained the effect of the supersession clause contained in the 2010 statute: “Under th[e] new law, when the Commission recommends an increase in judicial salaries, the increase goes into effect by operation of law on April 1 of the year for which it is recommended, unless the Legislature passes a statute rejecting the recommended pay raise” (Larabee, 27 NY3d at 472 ).3 The Court opined that the enactment of the 2010 statute remedied “the constitutional violation that led to our decision in Matter of Maron,” and 3 The dissent takes issue with our citation to the facts in Larabe | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Levine v. Whalen
green
1 sentence2022The supersession clause at issue here is amenable to our well-established test for deciding whether the legislature has unconstitutionally delegated the “power to make the law,” or whether the contested statutory provision merely “confer[s] authority or discretion as to a law’s execution” (Levine, 39 NY2d 510, 515 ). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
MATTER OF HUNT BROS., INC. v. Glennon
green
2 sentences1993In Matter of Hunt Bros. v Glennon ( 180 AD2d 157 , revd 81 NY2d 906 ), this Court was called upon to determine the applicability of the supersession clause to the provisions of the Adirondack Park Agency (hereinafter APA) Act (Executive Law art 27), which allowed sand and gravel mining operations within the Adirondack Park upon review and approval by the APA. 1993In Matter of Hunt Bros. v Glennon ( 180 AD2d 157 , revd 81 NY2d 906 ), this Court was called upon to determine the applicability of the supersession clause to the provisions of the Adirondack Park Agency (hereinafter APA) Act (Executive Law art 27), which allowed sand and gravel mining operations within the Adirondack Park upon review and approval by the APA. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Hunt Bros. v. Glennon
neutral
2 sentences1993In Matter of Hunt Bros. v Glennon ( 180 AD2d 157 , revd 81 NY2d 906 ), this Court was called upon to determine the applicability of the supersession clause to the provisions of the Adirondack Park Agency (hereinafter APA) Act (Executive Law art 27), which allowed sand and gravel mining operations within the Adirondack Park upon review and approval by the APA. 1993In Matter of Hunt Bros. v Glennon ( 180 AD2d 157 , revd 81 NY2d 906 ), this Court was called upon to determine the applicability of the supersession clause to the provisions of the Adirondack Park Agency (hereinafter APA) Act (Executive Law art 27), which allowed sand and gravel mining operations within the Adirondack Park upon review and approval by the APA. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
People v. Hedgeman
green
1 sentence1987To find the answer, we look to the plain meaning of the phrase "relating to the extractive mining industry” as one part of the entire Mined Land Reclamation Law, to the relevant legislative history, and to the underlying purposes of the supersession clause as part of the statutory scheme (see, People v Hedgeman, 70 NY2d 533, 537 ; Price v Price, 69 NY2d 8, 13, 14 ). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Hines v. Davidowitz
green
1 sentence1957The circumstances under which such a doctrine would apply are outlined in Pennsylvania v. Nelson ( 350 U. S. 497 ) and Hines v. Davidowitz ( 312 U. S. 52 ). | 1 | 1957–1957 |
Pennsylvania v. Nelson
green
1 sentence1957The circumstances under which such a doctrine would apply are outlined in Pennsylvania v. Nelson ( 350 U. S. 497 ) and Hines v. Davidowitz ( 312 U. S. 52 ). | 1 | 1957–1957 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.