Funderburke v. New York State Department of Civil Service
| Decision Date | 25 March 2008 |
| Docket Number | 2006-07589. |
| Citation | 2008 NY Slip Op 02789,854 N.Y.S.2d 466,49 A.D.3d 809 |
| Parties | DUKE L. FUNDERBURKE, Appellant, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SERVICE et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Motions by the respondents to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the appeal has been rendered academic, and cross motion by the appellant to vacate the order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered July 12, 2006, in the event that the appeal is dismissed. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated August 28, 2007 , the motions and cross motion were held in abeyance and were referred to the Justices hearing the appeal for determination upon the argument or submission thereof.
Ordered that appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements, and the order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered July 12, 2006, and a subsequent order of the same court entered September 13, 2006, made upon reargument, are vacated.
The plaintiff is a retired school teacher previously employed by the defendant Uniondale Union Free School District (hereinafter the District). In 2004, he and his same-sex partner of many years legally married in Ontario, Canada. The plaintiff then requested spousal health and dental insurance coverage from the District for his spouse. After the District denied the request, the plaintiff commenced this action against the District and the New York State Department of Civil Service (hereinafter the DCS), as well as certain District and DCS officials and employees, seeking compensatory and injunctive relief and a declaration that the benefits had been illegally denied. The Supreme Court granted the respective motions of the District and its officials and employees, and the DCS and its officials and employees, for summary judgment. The plaintiff appeals.
During the pendency of the appeal, the DCS changed its policy regarding recognition of foreign same-sex marriages. The DCS now requires public employers within its jurisdiction to provide full spousal benefits to same-sex couples validly married in another jurisdiction, and requires all members of its health insurance program, including the District, to provide such benefits. The DCS further committed to the payment of out-of-pocket medical expenses incurred by the plaintiff in obtaining health coverage for his spouse from the time of the plaintiff's application for spousal health coverage. On May 3, 2007 the District notified the plaintiff that his spouse would be eligible to enroll in the Empire Plan, which is one of the medical and health insurance plans made available to employees of the State and its subdivisions. The District further changed its eligibility policy for its dental plan pursuant to a resolution of the Board of Education of the District, notified the plaintiff of the change, and committed to reimburse him the maximum amount of dental coverage which would have been available to his spouse had he been enrolled in the program since the time that the initial coverage request was made.
"It is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence that the power of a court to declare the law only arises out of, and is limited to,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Berger v. Prospect Park Residence, LLC, 2017-09743
...(see Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 713, 431 N.Y.S.2d 400, 409 N.E.2d 876 ; Funderburke v. New York State Dept. of Civ. Serv., 49 A.D.3d 809, 810–811, 854 N.Y.S.2d 466 ). Thus, courts ordinarily may not consider questions that have become moot by passage of time or change i......
-
Olney v. Town of Barrington
...A.D.3d at 208, 790 N.Y.S.2d 4 ; Cohen , 301 A.D.2d at 447, 753 N.Y.S.2d 500 ; see generally Funderburke v. New York State Dept. of Civ. Serv. , 49 A.D.3d 809, 811, 854 N.Y.S.2d 466 [2d Dept. 2008] ; Matter of Ruskin v. Safir , 257 A.D.2d 268, 271, 692 N.Y.S.2d 356 [1st Dept. 1999] ...
-
E–z Eating 41 Corp.. v. H.E. Newport L.L.C.
...which is unreviewable for mootness from spawning any legal consequences or precedent’ ” ( see Funderburke v. New York State Dept. of Civ. Serv., 49 A.D.3d 809, 811, 854 N.Y.S.2d 466 [2008], quoting Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d at 718, 431 N.Y.S.2d 400, 409 N.E.2d 876). Our vac......
-
Supreme Court Justices Ass'n of N.Y., Inc. v. Admin. Bd. of the N.Y.S. Unified Court Sys.
...Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 718, 431 N.Y.S.2d 400, 409 N.E.2d 876 [1980] ; Funderburke v. State Dept. of Civ. Serv., 49 A.D.3d 809, 811–812, 854 N.Y.S.2d 466 [2d Dept. 2008] ; Matter of Finkelstein v. New York State Bd. of Law Examiners, 241 A.D.2d 728, 729, 660 N.Y.S.2d......