From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Przyborowski v. O'Connell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 21, 1947
272 App. Div. 1096 (N.Y. App. Div. 1947)

Opinion

November 21, 1947.

Appeal from Supreme Court.


Plaintiffs are not entitled to maintain this action. They had a complete remedy under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review the determination of defendants. Having failed to avail themselves of that remedy, they could not maintain an action for declaratory judgment. Order reversed on the law, without costs. Motion granted, without costs. Hill, P.J., Heffernan, Foster and Russell, JJ., concur; Brewster, J., taking no part.


Summaries of

Przyborowski v. O'Connell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 21, 1947
272 App. Div. 1096 (N.Y. App. Div. 1947)
Case details for

Przyborowski v. O'Connell

Case Details

Full title:HENRY F. PRZYBOROWSKI et al., Respondents, v. JOHN F. O'CONNELL et al.…

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

Date published: Nov 21, 1947

Citations

272 App. Div. 1096 (N.Y. App. Div. 1947)

Citing Cases

Riesner v. Young

The plaintiff as a citizen and resident is entitled to maintain such a proceeding (Matter of Andresen v.…

Colson v. Wilson

"Parallel and available remedies specially designed to reach this kind of a controversy" are provided by…