From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Koehler v. Department of Agriculture Markets

Supreme Court, Special Term, Broome County
Jul 8, 1937
164 Misc. 44 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1937)

Opinion

July 8, 1937.

Mangan Mangan and Harry S. Travis, for the plaintiff.

John J. Bennett, Jr., Attorney-General; Henry Epstein, Solicitor-General; Milo R. Kniffen, Counsel to Department of Agriculture and Markets [ Robert G. Blabey, Assistant Counsel, of counsel], for the defendants.


For the reasons outlined in Pavlick v. Department of Agriculture Markets ( 164 Misc. 42), decided concurrently herewith, the motion of the plaintiff for an injunction pendente lite is denied, without costs.

The motion of the defendants to dismiss the complaint is granted without costs, upon the ground that the complaint now fails to state cause of action, as it seeks to enjoin the enforcement and to secure a declaratory judgment of unconstitutionality as to a statute that by legislation has ceased to exist.

Submit orders accordingly.


Summaries of

Koehler v. Department of Agriculture Markets

Supreme Court, Special Term, Broome County
Jul 8, 1937
164 Misc. 44 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1937)
Case details for

Koehler v. Department of Agriculture Markets

Case Details

Full title:ALBERT H. KOEHLER, Plaintiff, v. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND MARKETS OF…

Court:Supreme Court, Special Term, Broome County

Date published: Jul 8, 1937

Citations

164 Misc. 44 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1937)
299 N.Y.S. 131

Citing Cases

Rueffer v. Dept. of Agriculture Markets

We place a different interpretation upon chapter 579 of the Laws of 1937 than has been given by the other…