From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fine v. Commr. of Dept. of Consumer Affairs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 11, 1990
168 A.D.2d 285 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

December 11, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Leland G. DeGrasse, J.).


Plaintiff, a Jewish civil process server who observes a Saturday Sabbath, challenged the constitutionality of General Business Law § 11 which prohibits the service of process on Sunday with specified exceptions. Section 11 Gen. Bus. of the General Business Law is not an unconstitutional establishment of religion, nor does it violate the equal protection clauses of our State and Federal Constitutions. The statute serves a legitimate State objective in providing a day of rest for its citizens and neither forces plaintiff to observe Sunday Sabbath nor hinders him from observing his own Sabbath (Braunfeld v. Brown, 366 U.S. 599, reh denied 368 U.S. 869; Matter of Shattenkirk v. Finnerty, 97 A.D.2d 51, affd. 62 N.Y.2d 949).

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Carro, Milonas and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

Fine v. Commr. of Dept. of Consumer Affairs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 11, 1990
168 A.D.2d 285 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Fine v. Commr. of Dept. of Consumer Affairs

Case Details

Full title:MARSHALL R. FINE, Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER…

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

Date published: Dec 11, 1990

Citations

168 A.D.2d 285 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
562 N.Y.S.2d 511

Citing Cases

Fine v. Commr. of Dept. of Consumer Affairs of CT

Decided February 19, 1991 Appeal from (1st Dept: 168 A.D.2d 285) APPEALS ON CONSTITUTIONAL…

Carbon Capital Mgt., LLC v. Am. Express Co.

The only exception contained in § 11 are criminal proceedings. Nevertheless, in Fine v Commissioner, 168 AD2d…