Marcelin v. Scott

Decision Date20 October 1969
Citation33 A.D.2d 588,304 N.Y.S.2d 299
PartiesIn the Matter of Harvey MARCELIN, Appellant, v. Joseph SCOTT et al., Respondents.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Rex Ruthman, Albany, for appellant.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen., Calvin M. Berger, Albany, for respondents.

Before HERLIHY, P.J., and STALEY, GREENBLOTT and COOKE, JJ.

COOKE, Justice.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered February 1, 1969, which dismissed the application of petitioner, an inmate at a state prison, in a proceeding stated to be under CPLR article 4 'for an enforcement of the Federal, State Civil Rights Act in which petitioner is deprived of by respondents constituting illegal detention of petitioner; * * * for an order permanently restraining certain excessive deprivations and inflictions summarily upon petitioner.' Citing Wright v. McMann, 2 Cir., 387 F.2d 519, decided in 1967, Special Term stated that 'injunctive relief and remedy lie exclusively with the Federal Court by reason of the absence of legislative mandate for the state courts to pursue.' 59 Misc.2d 38, 298 N.Y.S.2d 43.

Respondents agree that the question of whether the court below had jurisdiction over the matter at the time of its decision is now academic by virtue of chapter 658 of the Laws of 1969, effective May 21, 1969, which amended section 79--c of the Civil Rights Law by adding thereto: 'Nothing in sections seventy-nine or seventy-nine-a of this chapter shall be deemed to deny a convict sentenced to imprisonment the right to injunctive relief for improper treatment where such treatment constitutes a violation of his constitutional rights.' Said amendment, remedial in nature, designed to correct an imperfection in the prior law or to provide a remedy for a wrong if none previously existed, is to be liberally construed so as to spread its beneficial results as widely as possible, it being an exemption to the general rule that statutes are not to be given a retroactive operation (People v. Cornish, 21 A.D.2d 280, 283, 250 N.Y.S.2d 233, 236; Matter of Robinson (Catherwood), 11 A.D.2d 374, 376, 207 N.Y.S.2d 297, 298; McKinney's Cons.Laws of N.Y., Book 1, Statutes, § 54).

Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, and matter remitted for further proceedings, without costs.

HERLIHY, P.J., and STALEY and GREENBLOTT, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Rodriguez v. McGinnis, 354-356
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • 25 Enero 1972
    ...existed, is to be liberally construed so as to spread its beneficial results as widely as possible ...." Marcelin v. Scott, 33 A.D.2d 588, 304 N.Y.S.2d 299, 300-301 (1969). 3 These figures are a breakdown of the national totals reported in Table 14 in the 1971 Criminal Report of the Directo......
  • Wright v. McMann
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of New York
    • 31 Julio 1970
    ...the amendment was to be given liberal construction and retroactive application. (In re Marcelin v. Scott (App.Div., 3rd Dept. Oct. 20, 1969) 33 A.D.2d 588, 304 N.Y.S.2d 299). However, the stages of the two cases herein have advanced too far along the federal route. The doctrine of abstentio......
  • Eckel v. Hassan
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 16 Enero 1978
    ...Matter of Mlodozeniec v. Worthington Corp., 9 A.D.2d 21, 189 N.Y.S.2d 468 (Workmen's Compensation Law, § 44-a) and Matter of Marcelin v. Scott, 33 A.D.2d 588, 304 N.Y.S.2d 299 (Civil Rights Law, § As we view it, therefore, for the Legislature to have intended other than to apply the statute......
  • Bilello v. A. J. Eckert Co.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 12 Julio 1973
    ...litigation relates to his conviction or sentence, or to conditions of imprisonment. (Civil Rights Law, § 79--c; Matter of Marcelin v. Scott, 33 A.D.2d 588, 304 N.Y.S.2d 299.) Prisoners serving life sentences may never be able to sue under the present law, since CPLR 208 limits the tolling o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT