§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Gerald E. Loehr et al., Respondents,v.Administrative Board of the Courts of the State of New York, Appellant.

Brief

13 Cited authorities

  1. Cook v. City of Binghamton

    48 N.Y.2d 323 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 88 times
    In Cook v. City of Binghamton (48 N.Y.2d 323), however, the Court of Appeals considered and rejected an essentially identical claim.

  2. Ballentine v. Koch

    89 N.Y.2d 51 (N.Y. 1996)   Cited 24 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Police Benevolent Association, which had agreed to recommend to the state legislature a bill creating a separate benefit fund, was bound by version of law negotiated and passed during legislative process. The Court also held that PBA officers were "acting outside the scope of its representational authority in agreeing to the statutory provisions at issue . . . [P]laintiffs designated the PBA as their agent for the collective bargaining negotiations at issue here and were thus bound by its actions taken on their behalf during the negotiation process . . ."

  3. Loehr v. Admin. Bd. of the Courts of State

    130 A.D.3d 89 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)   Cited 5 times

    519568 06-18-2015 In the Matter of Gerald E. LOEHR et al., Appellants, v. ADMINISTRATIVE BOARD OF the COURTS OF the STATE of New York, Respondent. Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker, LLP, White Plains (Robert A. Spolzino of counsel), for appellants. John W. McConnell, Office of Court Administration, New York City (John J. Sullivan, Albany, of counsel), for respondent. CLARK, J. Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker, LLP, White Plains (Robert A. Spolzino of counsel), for appellants. John W

  4. Slavsky v. New York City Police Dept.

    967 F. Supp. 117 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)   Cited 12 times
    Rejecting equal protection challenge to similar New York City rules and noting that "[t]he fact that the City also could have restricted pension payments for those who take private employment does not mean that it cannot limit expenditures for those whom the public fisc is liable for both the pension and the employment benefits"

  5. Hagler v. Paterson

    30 Misc. 3d 684 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2010)

    No. 6176-10. December 13, 2010. Chamberlain D'Amanda Oppenheimer Greenfield LLP, Rochester ( Matthew J. Fusco of counsel), for petitioners. Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany ( Adrienne J. Kerwin of counsel), for respondents. OPINION OF THE COURT RICHARD M. PLATKIN, J. Petitioners are members of the New York State Board of Parole (Parole Board) who receive retirement benefits from the State of New York. By this proceeding, they seek an order compelling the Governor to apply to the New York

  6. Matter of Baker v. Regan

    68 N.Y.2d 335 (N.Y. 1986)   Cited 18 times
    In Baker v. Regan, 68 N.Y.2d 335, 509 N.Y.S.2d 301, 501 N.E.2d 1192 (1986), five state-court judges purported to retire after they were re-elected and, after commencing their new terms of office, collected retirement benefits along with their judicial salaries.

  7. Marro v. Bartlett

    46 N.Y.2d 674 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 25 times
    Holding that judge denied certification "was not entitled to . . . any statement of the reasons for the action of the Administrative Board"

  8. Ahr v. City of New York

    243 A.D.2d 293 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)   Cited 2 times

    October 9, 1997 Appeal from Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.). The IAS Court correctly declared the subject agreements legal on the ground that plaintiffs' collective bargaining agents, defendants unions, were free to waive article V, § 7's protections as to funds ordinarily included in the calculation of pension benefits in exchange for higher annual longevity bonuses, and that plaintiffs are bound by the actions taken on their behalf by defendant unions in the negotiating

  9. Incorporated Village of Nissequogue v. New York State Civil Service Commission

    220 A.D.2d 53 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)   Cited 3 times

    June 20, 1996 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Albany County, Lawrence E. Kahn, J. Cahn Wishod Lamb, L.L.P., Melville (Scott M. Karson, Eugene L. Wishod and Joel M. Markowitz of counsel), for appellants. Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney-General, Albany (Francis V. Dow and Nancy A. Spiegel of counsel), for respondent. MERCURE, J. As a general rule, an individual who is retired from service with the State, a municipal corporation or a political subdivision of the State may not engage in the practice known as

  10. McCulloch v. Maryland

    17 U.S. 316 (1819)   Cited 941 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding federal law to be supreme over state law