Opinion
January 27, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Albany County (Prior, Jr., J.).
Petitioners commenced this matter seeking to enjoin respondents from conducting a planned Environmental Sabbath service on April 26, 1992 at the Adirondack Park Visitor Interpretive Center in Paul Smiths, Franklin County, in celebration of Earth Day. Petitioners contend that the service would violate the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution. Petitioners obtained a temporary restraining order on April 24, 1992 which prohibited respondents from allowing the use of any State property for the purpose of any religious or worship activities, including the use of the Adirondack Park Visitor Interpretive Center for conducting the Environmental Sabbath. The planned service was moved to a local church.
Because the planned event did not take place on State property and respondent Chair of the Adirondack Park Agency declared that the Agency had no present or future plans to organize, promote or sponsor any similar such events, Supreme Court concluded that the underlying controversy had been rendered moot and that a judicial determination relative to the injunctive or declaratory relief sought would constitute the rendering of an advisory opinion.
We agree. "`[I]t is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence that our duty to declare the law only arises out of and is limited to determining actual controversies between litigants before us'" (Matter of Schulz v. State of New York, 182 A.D.2d 3, 4-5, appeal dismissed 80 N.Y.2d 924, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 761, quoting Matter of Herald Co. v. O'Brien, 149 A.D.2d 781, 782). We are not persuaded that this case satisfies the three-prong test for the application of the exception to the doctrine of mootness established in Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne ( 50 N.Y.2d 707, 714-715). Upon review of this record we first determine that it is unlikely that the same or similar form of "Environmental Sabbath" on State property will recur. Second, there is nothing in the record to suggest that this is the type of phenomenon which typically evades judicial review (see, Matter of Capital Dist. Greens v. City of Albany, 195 A.D.2d 767). Third, the issue presented here is not novel for courts have often had occasion to address Establishment Clause challenges (see, Grumet v. Board of Educ., 81 N.Y.2d 518, cert granted ___ US ___, 114 S Ct 544; see also, Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668; Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783).
Mikoll, Crew III, White and Weiss, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.