From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gandin, Schotsky Rappaport v. Suffolk Cty

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 1, 1996
226 A.D.2d 339 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

April 1, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gerard, J.).


Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof declaring Suffolk County Code § 704-1 void and substituting therefor a provision declaring Suffolk County Code § 704-1 (A), (C), and (D) void; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with costs to the plaintiffs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for entry of a judgment declaring Suffolk County Code § 704-1 (A), (C), and (D) void.

Public Officers Law § 87 (1) (b) (iii) limits the fees which can be charged for copies of agency records to 25 cents per photocopy, or the actual cost of reproducing a record, "except when a different fee is otherwise prescribed by statute." In this action, the plaintiffs challenge the validity of those portions of Suffolk County Code § 704-1 which require the payment of a $20 fee for a copy of a police motor vehicle accident, burglary, or stolen vehicle report. They contend that the local law is invalid because it is inconsistent with the fee limitations set forth in the State statute.

The plaintiffs, who advanced the fees for police reports or were ultimately responsible for the payment of those fees, have standing to seek declaratory and injunctive relief inasmuch as they have an actual legal stake in the adjudication of this matter ( see, Society of Plastics Indus. v. County of Suffolk, 77 N.Y.2d 761, 772-773; 43 N.Y. Jur 2d, Declaratory Judgments, § 140). To the extent the appellants contend that the plaintiffs are not entitled to recover any overpayment, we note that the plaintiffs did not specifically request such relief in their motion and the court did not direct a refund or grant a money judgment.

The Supreme Court properly concluded that the $20 fee authorized and charged by the appellants is invalid. Public Officers Law § 87 (1) (b) (iii) clearly limits the fee which can be charged for a photocopy of a record unless a different fee is prescribed by statute. Suffolk County Code § 704-1 is a local law, not a statute ( see, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 1, Statutes § 1; Sheehan v. City of Syracuse, 137 Misc.2d 438, 440). Consequently, those portions of Suffolk County Code § 704-1 which require the payment of a $20 fee for copies of police reports are invalid because they are inconsistent with Public Officers Law § 87 (1) (b) (iii) ( see, Consolidated Edison Co. v Town of Red Hook, 60 N.Y.2d 99, 107; Sheehan v. City of Syracuse, supra). However, the declaratory relief granted by the court should have been limited to Suffolk County Code § 704-1 (A), (C), and (D), which prescribe the $20 fee. The propriety of the fees charged for photographs (Suffolk County Code § 704-1 [B]) and letters of good conduct (Suffolk County Code § 704-1 [E]) were not challenged by the plaintiffs.

The appellants' remaining contention is without merit. Mangano, P.J., Miller, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Gandin, Schotsky Rappaport v. Suffolk Cty

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 1, 1996
226 A.D.2d 339 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Gandin, Schotsky Rappaport v. Suffolk Cty

Case Details

Full title:GANDIN, SCHOTSKY RAPPAPORT, P.C., et al., Respondents, v. SUFFOLK COUNTY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 1, 1996

Citations

226 A.D.2d 339 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
640 N.Y.S.2d 214

Citing Cases

New York Central Mut v. Town of Cheektowaga

Supreme Court concluded that the fees set forth in the local law were not "prescribed by statute," and the…

Brown v. Goord

71 NY2d 146, 150, cert denied 486 US 1056 [1987], quoting Matter of Capital Newspapers, Div. of Hearst Corp.…