Quaglia v. INC. VILL. OF MUNSEY PARK
Cases that cite this one
20 later published cases cite this decision.
- Voss v. City of Middleton (Wis. 1991)
- Dominici v. Lentini (2d Cir. 2001)
- Fountain Hills Civic Ass'n v. City of Scottsdale (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986)
- Tilcon New York, Inc. v. Town of Poughkeepsie (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
- Shlomo v. Eristoff (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)
- Aeneas McDonald Police Benevolent Ass'n v. City of Geneva (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- In re City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)
- Wade v. Kujawski (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
- Laurenson v. City of New York (New York Supreme Court 1989)
- Bell v. New York Higher Education Assistance Corp. (New York Supreme Court 1988)
- Kelly v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
- Porter v. Callahan (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
- Prospect v. Cohalan (N.Y. 1985)
- Willis v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- Muller v. State (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- Hilpl v. Paterson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)
- Prey v. County of Cattaraugus (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1981)
- Newsday, Inc. v. Town of Huntington (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1981)
- Iazzetta v. State (N.Y. Ct. Cl. 1980)
- Galanthay v. New York State Teachers' Retirement System (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1979)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
Louis F. Quaglia et al., Respondents,
v.
Incorporated Village of Munsey Park, Appellant.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
Fred A. Williams for appellant.
Patrick J. Rohan and Michael P. Sanchirico for respondents.
Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and COOKE concur in memorandum.
*774MEMORANDUM.
Order of the Appellate Division affirmed, with costs in all courts. The village as a municipal body enacting laws or adopting ordinances or resolutions with respect to its public responsibilities may act only in furtherance of a public purpose. Despite a meticulous and byzantine delineation of resolutions, map changes, and transfers and retransfers of title over a 40-year period centered on a three-foot strip of land purportedly detached from a public street, no plausible public purpose is made apparent or even argued to be served. By the erection of a stone barrier in 1975 on this three-foot strip plaintiffs are purposelessly denied access from their residence to the abutting public street. Neither the law nor the courts may or should be used to serve such an act. When no public purpose is perceived to be served, an owner may not be denied access to a public street (see Regan v Lanze, 40 N.Y.2d 475, 482-483; 10 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations [3d ed, 1966 rev vol], § 30.54; cf. Farrell v Rose, 253 N.Y. 73, 76).
Order affirmed, etc.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.