Case Name: State of New York, Appellant-Respondent, v. Glen & Mohawk Milk Association, Inc., et al., Respondents, and Queensboro Farm Products, Inc., et al., Respondents-Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1983-04-01
Citations: 93 A.D.2d 975
Docket Number: 
Parties: State of New York, Appellant-Respondent, v Glen & Mohawk Milk Association, Inc., et al., Respondents, and Queensboro Farm Products, Inc., et al., Respondents-Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 93
Pages: 975–977

Head Matter:
State of New York, Appellant-Respondent, v Glen & Mohawk Milk Association, Inc., et al., Respondents, and Queensboro Farm Products, Inc., et al., Respondents-Appellants.

Opinion:
— Order and judgment affirmed, without costs, for reasons stated at Special Term, Reagan, J. Memorandum: We add only that the language of subdivision 3 of section 340 of the General Business Law does not permit the interpretation advanced by the dissent. That subdivision unambiguously states that "the provisions of this article [the Donnelly Act] shall not apply to cooperative associations of dairymen" (emphasis supplied). The Court of Appeals has recently reminded us that the court "should not ignore the words of a statute, clear on its face, to reach a different result through judicial interpretation (McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 1, Statutes, § 76)." (Matter of Kleefeld, 55 NY2d 253, 259.) Concur — Dillon, P. J., Boomer and Moule, JJ.