Memo in Support of Motion to Intervene (PDF) - New York Civil ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table of Contents Page Memorandum of Law In Support of Proposed Intervenor Defendants Motion to Interven e """ , , 1 Prelimina Statement " ", ".'1 Il. Proposed Intervenors .tI 11"'1 't'"I' t", I tI I t, tt, 'II"" tI III f'" "'It tI' t II t, tt tI ""'" If' I ,_". tt '11" tt t •• ",."" to 6 Ill, Interests of Proposed Intervenors in this Lawsuit " ..,7 J. This Court Should Grant Intervention as of Right " """" " " ..""."",,9 II. This Court Should GrantIntervention as of'Right., ".""".""""""." .."."""" ..".",,9 A. Proposed Intervenors Acted in a Timely Mal1l1er""""".""""""." " 10 B. Defendants Will Not Adequately Represent the Interests of Proposed Intervenors •• "I ••• '.', ••• ' •• ,I ••• "', •• , •••• ,,".".,"."."" •• ,"'.'-II."' •• "'.,I'.,"I ••• "'", •••• , •• , •• " •• , •• """'",'1""",.,, •• 10 C. Proposed Intervenors Will Be Bound by the Judgment " 16 III. The Court Should Also Grant Permissive Intervention ..18 Conclusion "..""".".""" ".".."" ""., .."., " ,,, "..,,20
Table of Authorities Page(s) Cases Bay State Heating & Air Conditioning Co. v American Ins. Co., 78 AD2d 147, 149 [4th Dept 1980] "" I t tt " •••• It Ol """ ",. I" I' tt. " t It ••• " ••••••••••••• ", It' '" " "" '" '" '" "'l It.", ""'" tI" , •• , ",18 Berkoski v Board of Trustees II" ,.,1 of Inc. Vil. of Southampton, 67 AD3d 840, 843 [2d Dept 2009] ., ,.'t'I'IIII"" ,.,'""""·,, .••.. ' .••• ',I.,.,.,"I " ..• "" ". """'" .•.• " ,••••.•••. , ••.••.••.. ".,.""".16 Civil Service Bar Assoc., etc. v New York, 64 AD2d 594, 595 [1st Dept 1978] 12 County of Westchester v Department of Health, 229 AD2d 460, 461 [2d Dept 1996] 16 Dalton v Pataki, 5 NY3d 243, 277 78 [Ct App 2005] w 16 Herdman v Town of Angelica, 163 FRD 180, 189 9l w fWD NY 1995] 13 In re Waxman, 96 AD2d 908, 908 [2d Dept 1983] 12 Jeffer v Jeffer, 28 Mise 3d l238A [Sup Ct, Kings County 2010] 10 Kaczmarek v Shoffstall, 119 AD2d 1001, 1002 [4th Dept 1986] 17 Lenihan v Blackwell, 209 AD2d 1048, 1049 [4th Dept 1994] 11 Little v New York State Task Force on Demographic Research and Reapportionment, et. al., index No. 2310..2011, tt """," " I •• "".i, , •• " ••• If tI. t. Ol ,."., """"'" ."., •••• ,.,., , •• , Matter of Romeo v New York State Dept. ofEduc., " ."", 39 AD3d 916,917 """ ".1 [3d Dept 2007] .. 10 McCall v Hynes, 196 AD2d 618, 6l8w619 [2d Dept 1993] 11 Mcûermott v Mcûermott, 119 AD2d 370,374 [2d Dept 1986] 19 N. Y. Pub. Interest Research Group, Inc. v Regents of the Univ. of the State of N. Y., 516 F2d 350, 352 [2d Cil' 1975] 13 Oleska v D 'Apice, 123 AD2d 302 [Zd Dept 1986] 11 Grans v Rockefeller, 47 Mise2d 493, 497 [Sup Ct, New York County 1965] 11, 12 Patterson Materials Corp. v Town of Paw ling, 221 AD2d 609,610 [2d Dept 1995] 19 Perl v Aspromonte Realty Corp., 143 AD2d 824, 825 [2d Dept 1988] 16 Plantech Housing) Inc. v Conlan, 74 AD2d 920, 921 [2d Dept 1980] 20 Prometheus Realty v City of New York, 2009 NY Slip Op 30273[U], *4~5 [Sup Ct, New Yor!< County 2009] """ ,. I ••••••• Ramos v Alpert, 41 AD2d 1012 [3d Dept 1973] 11 Sieger v Sieger, 297 AD2d 33, 36 [2d Dept 2002] 16 State ex rel. Field v. Cranshaw, 139 Mise 2d 470,472 [Sup Ct, Nassau County 1988] 12 Subdivisions, Inc. v Town ofSullivan, 75 AD3d 978, 979 80 [3d Dept 2010] w 12 Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp. v State Board of Equalization & Assessment, 34 . AD2d 1033 [3d Dept 1970] .,."." -., ,." ' "'.I ••••••••• """"""""""1""""""",, ••• 9 Town of Southold v Cross Sound Ferry Servs. , 256 AD2d 403, 404 [2d Dept 1998] 18 Trbovich v United Mine Workers of America, 404 U.S. 528, 538 note 10 [1972] 12 Vantage Petroleum v Board of Assessment Review, 61 NY2d 695, 698 [Ct App 1984] .. 17 Vantage Petroleum v Board of Assessment Review, 91 AD2d 1037, 1040 [2d Dept 1983], . , . , , . , 1 • " •• , • , •• , • t • I , • I t ••• , t , I ••••• • I • I , • , , ••• , •• , , , •••• , , , •• , , , , I • I I "1 , , I , I I • , ••••• ,. 12 Yuppie Puppy Pet Prods. v Street Smart Realty, LLC, 77 AD3d 197,201 [1st Dept 2010] ".f ••• ,t. ,." ." •••• , ••• ,., ••• , """"",."t.""".,,, •.• ""' ••. "", ••••••• ,."".,.,." """"""f""" ""'t. 10, 11., 16, 17 Constitutions N,Y. Const. Art II, § 4,., "'1""'" II" ••• ""'" " •••••• , t,. , ••• "".f",, t I" ." "" I" .,1 ._., ,., •• ,,2 Other Authorities u
Page 1: SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW Y
Page 5 and 6: MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PRO
Page 7 and 8: of the statute and a declaration th
Page 9 and 10: incarcerated person has been at his
Page 11 and 12: ecause their local county legislati
Page 13 and 14: not live in local districts with pr
Page 15 and 16: ights protected by part XX. Defenda
Page 17 and 18: In this case, proposed intervenors'
Page 19 and 20: DOCS has not argued that the prior
Page 21 and 22: As discussed above, proposed interv
Page 23 and 24: intervene because an increase in no
Page 25 and 26: Dated: May 17, 2011 Respectfully su
Page 27: * Seeking leave for admission pro h

Memo in Support of Motion to Intervene (PDF) - New York Civil ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?