New York Court of Appeals, 1984

Birkeland v. State

Birkeland v. State
New York Court of Appeals · Decided December 11, 1984
64 N.Y.2d 663; 474 N.E.2d 608; 485 N.Y.S.2d 248; 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4924

Birkeland v. State

Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the opinions of Justice Sol R. Dunkin, Supreme Court, Queens County, and Justice William C. Thompson at the Appellate Division.

We would emphasize that the Legislature’s enactment of chapter 846 occurred in the aftermath of the reorganization of the New York State court system and was parallel with similar legislation applicable, State-wide, to the other State judicial districts. In view of this particular situation and the express finding by the Legislature that the normal competitive procedures would greatly disrupt the functioning of the State court system, the statute cannot be said to offend the constitutional mandate (NY Const, art V, § 6).

Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur; Chief Judge Cooke taking no part.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.