From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mestichelli v. Valentine

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County
Oct 17, 1939
173 Misc. 539 (N.Y. Misc. 1939)

Opinion

October 17, 1939.

Henry Klauber [ Louis Baron of counsel], for the plaintiff.

William C. Chanler, Corporation Counsel [ Charles C. Weinstein and Bernard Friedlander of counsel], for the defendants.



This application is made by plaintiff, the proprietor of a retail gasoline station in Richmond county, New York city, for a temporary injunction restraining the police commissioner, the commissioner of the department of markets, and the director of the bureau of weights and measures, from enforcing against the plaintiff the provisions of subdivision b of section B36-101.0 of the New York City Administrative Code, as added by Local Law No. 141 of the New York City Local Laws of 1939.

The plaintiff's moving papers do not show any right to the extraordinary relief sought. Moreover, this court believes that the local law under attack is constitutional. It is not arbitrary, unreasonable or oppressive. Its purpose is salutary and it eradicates an evil. It applies with the same force to all dealers and gives no one any rights or privileges not enjoyed by other dealers. It does not discriminate against any one and makes all subject to the same restrictions which are reasonable and have been made to safeguard the general public. Clearly there can be no question that the great weight of authority in our courts sustains its constitutionality. ( Biddles, Inc., v. Enright, 239 N.Y. 354; New York ex rel. Silz v. Hesterberg, 211 U.S. 31; People v. Wolf, 220 A.D. 71; appeal dismissed, 247 N.Y. 189; Perlmutter v. Greene, 259 id. 327.) The only authority urged against it is Cowan v. City of Buffalo ( 247 A.D. 591). That case is not controlling. The ordinance was unreasonable and no public good was served by it. Nor was anything that was evil corrected. Certain competitors were exempted from its operation. The court found discrimination and held that it arbitrarily interfered with private business. No such situation is presented by these papers.

The motion for a temporary injunction is in all respects denied.


Summaries of

Mestichelli v. Valentine

Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County
Oct 17, 1939
173 Misc. 539 (N.Y. Misc. 1939)
Case details for

Mestichelli v. Valentine

Case Details

Full title:FLAVIA MESTICHELLI, Plaintiff, v. LEWIS J. VALENTINE, as Commissioner of…

Court:Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County

Date published: Oct 17, 1939

Citations

173 Misc. 539 (N.Y. Misc. 1939)
18 N.Y.S.2d 405

Citing Cases

Town of Miami Springs v. Scoville

" "`For a contrary view see Mestichelli v. Valentine [ 173 Misc. 539, 18 N.Y.S.2d 405], and Slome v. Godley,…

Opn. No. 1977-276

However, new subdivision 1-a of section 328-a of the General Business Law is almost identical to section B…