exceedingly strong presumption in New York

2025Subsidiaries v Tax Appeals Trib. of the State of N.Y. , 210 AD3d 86, 92 [3d Dept 2022] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citations omitted], affd 42 NY3d 538 [2024], cert denied ___ US ___, 145 S Ct 1125 [2025]); petitioner has not overcome that presumption.

2025Subsidiaries v Tax Appeals Trib. of the State of N.Y. , 210 AD3d 86, 92 [3d Dept 2022] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citations omitted], affd 42 NY3d 538 [2024], cert denied ___ US ___, 145 S Ct 1125 [2025]); petitioner has not overcome that presumption.

1997It is well established that zoning ordinances are "invested with an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality” (Town of Huntington v Park Shore Country Day Camp, 47 NY2d 61, 65 ; see also, Matter of Unification Theol.

1992It is well settled that "[zjoning ordinances are 'invested with an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality’ ” (Matter of Kransteuber v Scheyer, 80 NY2d 783, 786 , quoting from Town of Huntington v Park Shore Country Day Camp, 47 NY2d 61, 65 ; McGowan v Cohalan, 41 NY2d 434 ).

2000Legislative Enactments — Presumption of Constitutionality In Matter of Malpica-Orsini ( 36 NY2d 568, 570-571 [1975]), the Court of Appeals stated: “a legislative enactment carries with it an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality; that, while this presumption is rebuttable, unconstitutionality must be demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt; that every intendment is in favor of the statute’s validity; that the party alleging unconstitutionality has a heavy burden; and that only as a last resort will courts strike down legislative enactments on the ground of unconstitutionality.

1998CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Due Process Argument In Matter of Malpica-Orsini ( 36 NY2d 568, 570-571 [1975]), the Court of Appeals stated: “a legislative enactment carries with it an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality; that, while this presumption is rebuttable, unconstitutionality must be demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt; that every intendment is in favor of the statute’s validity; that the party alleging unconstitutionality has a heavy burden; and that only as a last resort will courts strike down legislative enactments on the ground of unconstitutionality.

2018"Legislative enactments are entitled to an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality'" ( Nicholson v Incorporated Vil. of Garden City , 112 AD3d 893 , 894, quoting Lighthouse Shores v Town of Islip , 41 NY2d 7 , 11).

2018"Legislative enactments are entitled to an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality'" ( Nicholson v Incorporated Vil. of Garden City , 112 AD3d 893 , 894, quoting Lighthouse Shores v Town of Islip , 41 NY2d 7 , 11).

2011(Marcus Assoc. v Town of Huntington, 45 NY2d 501, 505 [1978]; Wiggins v Town of Somers, 4 NY2d 215, 218 [1958].) As the Court of Appeals has stated, “The exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality applies not only to enactments of the Legislature but to ordinances of municipalities as well.

1976In this connection, not only is the respondent’s and the Attorney-General’s argument of validity bolstered by the broad sweep of Montgomery v Daniels ( 38 NY2d 41, 45 , supra) where the court said: "We hold that the New York no-fault automobile accident compensation law is not unconstitutional” 3 but also by the established rule that there is an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality in essence requiring demonstration of unconstitutionality beyond a reasonable doubt (Wasmuth v Allen, 14 NY2d 391, 397 ; Wiggins v Town of Somers, 4 NY2d 215, 218; Lincoln Bldg.

2015Municipal ordinances “enjoy ‘an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality’ ” (Cimato Bros. v Town of Pendleton, 270 AD2d 879, 879 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 757 [2000], quoting Lighthouse Shores v Town of Islip, 41 NY2d 7 , 11 [1976]), and such legislative enactments “are to be construed so as to avoid constitutional issues if such a construction is fairly possible” (FGL & L Prop.

2015Municipal ordinances “enjoy ‘an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality’ ” (Cimato Bros. v Town of Pendleton, 270 AD2d 879, 879 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 757 [2000], quoting Lighthouse Shores v Town of Islip, 41 NY2d 7 , 11 [1976]), and such legislative enactments “are to be construed so as to avoid constitutional issues if such a construction is fairly possible” (FGL & L Prop.

2015Corp. v City of Rye, 66 NY2d 111, 120 [1985]; see McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 1, Statutes § 150).

2015Corp. v City of Rye, 66 NY2d 111, 120 [1985]; see McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 1, Statutes § 150).

2024It is well settled that duly enacted statutes enjoy an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality, and "a party who asserts that a statute is facially unconstitutional must demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that the statute suffers from wholesale constitutional impairment" ( People v Davis , 13 NY3d 17 , 23—24 [2009] [internal citations and quotation marks omitted]; see , Matarazzo v Charlee Family Care In c. 218 AD3d 941 [2023]; Matter of Schulz v State of New York , 216 AD3d 21 , 25 [2023]).

2024It is well settled that duly enacted statutes enjoy an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality, and "a party who asserts that a statute is facially unconstitutional must demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that the statute suffers from wholesale constitutional impairment" ( People v Davis , 13 NY3d 17 , 23—24 [2009] [internal citations and quotation marks omitted]; see , Matarazzo v Charlee Family Care In c. 218 AD3d 941 [2023]; Matter of Schulz v State of New York , 216 AD3d 21 , 25 [2023]).

2019To begin, the legislature expressly made the amendments applicable to pending claims, and legislative enactments carry "an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality" ( Barklee Realty Co. v Pataki , 309 AD2d 310, 311 [1st Dept 2003] [internal quotation marks omitted], appeal dismissed 1 NY3d 622 [2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 707 [2004]).

2019To begin, the legislature expressly made the amendments applicable to pending claims, and legislative enactments carry "an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality" ( Barklee Realty Co. v Pataki , 309 AD2d 310, 311 [1st Dept 2003] [internal quotation marks omitted], appeal dismissed 1 NY3d 622 [2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 707 [2004]).

2013Furthermore, with the decision to grant or deny a request for a preliminary injunction committed to the sound discretion of the trial court, our review is “limited to whether Supreme Court has either exceeded or abused its discretion as a matter of law” (id.; see Nobu Next Door, LLC v Fine Arts Hous., Inc., 4 NY3d at 840 ; Doe v Axelrod, 73 NY2d at 750 ).

2013Furthermore, with the decision to grant or deny a request for a preliminary injunction committed to the sound discretion of the trial court, our review is “limited to whether Supreme Court has either exceeded or abused its discretion as a matter of law” (id.; see Nobu Next Door, LLC v Fine Arts Hous., Inc., 4 NY3d at 840 ; Doe v Axelrod, 73 NY2d at 750 ).

2013Notably, where, as here, the constitutionality of legislation is challenged, “the burden becomes more difficult as there exists an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality” (Matter of Schulz v State of New York, 217 AD2d 393, 396 [1995]).

2013Notably, where, as here, the constitutionality of legislation is challenged, “the burden becomes more difficult as there exists an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality” (Matter of Schulz v State of New York, 217 AD2d 393, 396 [1995]).

2011(Marcus Assoc. v Town of Huntington, 45 NY2d 501, 505 [1978]; Wiggins v Town of Somers, 4 NY2d 215, 218 [1958].) As the Court of Appeals has stated, “The exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality applies not only to enactments of the Legislature but to ordinances of municipalities as well.

1984H Judgment reversed, on the law, with costs, summary judgment is granted to defendant (CPLR 3212, subd [b]) and it is declared that the water rate regulations of the defendant are legal and not discriminatory insofar as they apply to plaintiff. 11Á municipal ordinance carries an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality (Marcus Assoc, v Town of Huntington, 45 NY2d 501 ).

2026"Legislative enactments carry an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality, and while this presumption is rebuttable, one undertaking that task carries a heavy burden of demonstrating unconstitutionality beyond a reasonable doubt" (<i>Matter of Kelsey v Hochul</i>, 221 AD3d 1236, 1237 [3d Dept 2023] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted], <i>appeal dismissed</i> 42 NY3d 960 [2024]; <i>see Stefanik v Hochul</i>, 43 NY3d 49, 57 [2024]).</p> <p>Defendant takes issue with the "good moral character" requirement contained in the firearm licensing scheme.

2026"Legislative enactments carry an exceedingly strong presumption of constitutionality, and while this presumption is rebuttable, one undertaking that task carries a heavy burden of demonstrating unconstitutionality beyond a reasonable doubt" (<i>Matter of Kelsey v Hochul</i>, 221 AD3d 1236, 1237 [3d Dept 2023] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted], <i>appeal dismissed</i> 42 NY3d 960 [2024]; <i>see Stefanik v Hochul</i>, 43 NY3d 49, 57 [2024]).</p> <p>Defendant takes issue with the "good moral character" requirement contained in the firearm licensing scheme.

2026Exec. , 108 AD3d 856, 857 [3d Dept 2013] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted], lv dismissed 21 NY3d 1051 [2013]).

2022"For purposes of equal protection review, a legislative classification, such as the one at bar, that neither makes distinctions on the basis of a suspect class nor impairs a fundamental right, must be upheld if the challenged classification is rationally related to achievement of a legitimate state purpose" ( Korotun v Incorporated Vil. of Bayville , 26 AD3d 311, 313 [2d Dept 2006] [citations omitted], lv denied 7 NY3d 701 [2006]; see New York State United Teachers v State of New York , 140 AD3d 90, 97 [3d Dept 2016], appeal dismissed 28 NY3d 978 [2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 915 [2017]).

2022"For purposes of equal protection review, a legislative classification, such as the one at bar, that neither makes distinctions on the basis of a suspect class nor impairs a fundamental right, must be upheld if the challenged classification is rationally related to achievement of a legitimate state purpose" ( Korotun v Incorporated Vil. of Bayville , 26 AD3d 311, 313 [2d Dept 2006] [citations omitted], lv denied 7 NY3d 701 [2006]; see New York State United Teachers v State of New York , 140 AD3d 90, 97 [3d Dept 2016], appeal dismissed 28 NY3d 978 [2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 915 [2017]).

2022Co. v Town Bd. of Town of Thompson , 285 AD2d 953, 955 [3d Dept 2001] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Chavis v New York Temporary State Commn. on Lobbying , 16 AD3d 886 [*5], 887 [3d Dept 2005]).