Case Name: Nedda R. Honig, on Behalf of Herself and All Other Residents of the County of Rensselaer, Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. Rensselaer County Legislature et al., Defendants, and State of New York et al., Appellants, and City of Troy et al., Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1973-03-23
Citations: 32 N.Y.2d 688
Docket Number: 
Parties: Nedda R. Honig, on Behalf of Herself and All Other Residents of the County of Rensselaer, Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. Rensselaer County Legislature et al., Defendants, and State of New York et al., Appellants, and City of Troy et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 32
Pages: 688–690

Head Matter:
Nedda R. Honig, on Behalf of Herself and All Other Residents of the County of Rensselaer, Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. Rensselaer County Legislature et al., Defendants, and State of New York et al., Appellants, and City of Troy et al., Respondents.
Argued March 21, 1973;
decided March 23, 1973.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (Robert W. Imrie, Ruth Kessler Toch and Jack W. Hoffman of counsel), for State of New York, appellant.
John E. Mirch for Thomas G. Cholakis, as Majority Leader of the Rensselaer County Legislature, appellant.
James T. Ronan for John A. Murphy, as Member of the Rensselaer County Legislature, appellant.
William Jubic, Corporation Counsel, for City of Troy, respondent.
Thomas V. Kenny, Edward M. Murray and Donald C. Bowes for Joseph G. Manupella, as Minority Leader of the Rensselaer County Legislature, respondent.

Opinion:
Order affirmed, without costs, on the opinion at the Appellate Division. We would hut add that the prior appeals did not preclude that court or this from approving the plan promulgated under the doctrine of law of the case (see, generally, Dall v. Time Inc., 252 App. Div. 636, 641, affd. 278 N. Y. 635, mot. for rearg. den. 278 N. Y. 718; Scott & Co. v. Scott, 186 App. Div. 518, 526; Master of Collins, 20 Misc 2d 283, 284 ; 5B C. J. S., Appeal & Error, § 1964, pp. 550-554; Ann., Law of the Case—Erroneous Decision, 87 ALR 2d 271, 275 et seq.). Under the circumstances the present plan became effective as of the time provided in the local law, the plan having been ultimately sustained.
Concur: Chief Judge Fulo and Judges Burke, Breitel,, Jasen, Cabrleulj, Jones and Wachxler.