From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pero v. City of Batavia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jan 27, 1984
99 A.D.2d 668 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Opinion

January 27, 1984

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Genesee County, Cicoria, J.

Present — Dillon, P.J., Hancock, Jr., Green, O'Donnell and Schnepp, JJ.


Judgment unanimously reversed, without costs, and judgment granted, in accordance with the following memorandum: Special Term declared that Local Law No. 4 of 1980 of the City of Batavia was a valid exercise of legislative authority. This local law replaced the examining board of plumbers established under section 40-a Gen. City of the General City Law, which possessed regulatory powers and other duties (see General City Law, § 44), with a local board endowed with advisory powers only; Special Term held that section 40-a Gen. City of the General City Law is a special law and thus does not render the local law invalid under article IX (§ 2, subd [c]) of the New York State Constitution or section 10 (subd 1, par [ii]) of the Municipal Home Rule Law. We agree that section 40-a Gen. City of the General City Law is not a general law, because it is not applicable to all cities and does not satisfy the dictates of the statute (see General City Law, § 57; Uniformed Firefighters Assn. v City of New York, 50 N.Y.2d 85, 90-91; cf. Matter of Radich v Council of City of Lackawanna, 93 A.D.2d 559, 564, aff'd. 61 N.Y.2d 652; Rozler v Franger, 61 A.D.2d 46, 51, aff'd. 46 N.Y.2d 760). Nevertheless, we find Local Law No. 4 invalid. Regulation of the plumbing trade is related to public health and is a matter of State-wide concern not within the property, affairs or government of local municipalities (see Adler v Deegan, 251 N.Y. 467, 476). The State Legislature by mandating the appointment of a board of plumbing examiners under section 40-a Gen. City of the General City Law has restricted the adoption of any local law governing the same subject matter. In view of this restriction, local legislation inconsistent with section 40-a Gen. City of the General City Law was not authorized (NY Const, art IX, § 2, subd c, par [ii], cl [10]; Municipal Home Rule Law, § 10, subd 1, par [ii], cl a, subcl [12]).


Summaries of

Pero v. City of Batavia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jan 27, 1984
99 A.D.2d 668 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)
Case details for

Pero v. City of Batavia

Case Details

Full title:DAVID M. PERO et al., Appellants, v. CITY OF BATAVIA et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Jan 27, 1984

Citations

99 A.D.2d 668 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Citing Cases

Taxicab Serv. Ass'n v. State

The State also has a strong interest in statewide uniformity. Thus we have Patrolmen's Benevolent Assn. v…

City of Buffalo v. Bucholtz Aviation, Inc.

Section 249 requires the authorization of the local legislative body and a determination by the State…