Lodico v. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF COUNTY OF ROCKLAND
| Decision Date | 16 May 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 65-Civ. 2361.,65-Civ. 2361. |
| Citation | 256 F. Supp. 440 |
| Parties | John LODICO, Sr., Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF the COUNTY OF ROCKLAND, Defendant, and Town of Clarkstown, Intervenor. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Roland, Hurley & Fox, Stony Point, N. Y., for plaintiff; Frederick P. Roland, Stony Point, N. Y., of counsel.
J. Martin Cornell, County Atty., for defendant.
Donald S. Tracy, Town Atty., for intervenor.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. of State of New York, Daniel M. Cohen, Asst. Atty. Gen.
Before MOORE, Circuit Judge, and CROAKE and BONSAL, District Judges.
After removal by the defendant, the plaintiff moved for summary judgment and the defendant sought to:
(1) add parties claimed to be indispensable, the State of New York, and the other towns in the county, contending that the county cannot reapportion without enabling legislation of the state and that any order of the court will directly affect the five towns in the county, and (2) refer "the motion to be heard and determined by a district court of three judges on the ground that the constitutional questions are such that the appeal from any order should be directly to the U. S. Supreme Court."
The intervenor supported the application of the defendant. The motions came on to be heard before Judge Croake in the motion part of this court on November 16, 1965, and after some consideration, in a memorandum filed January 17, 1966, the request to convene a panel was granted and the remaining applications were denied without prejudice to renewal before the panel. In an order filed simultaneously with the memorandum, the Hon. J. Edward Lumbard, Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals for this Circuit, designated that the Hon. Leonard P. Moore, United States Circuit Judge, and the Hon. Dudley B. Bonsal, United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, sit with Judge Croake in the statutory court. Argument was heard by the panel on February 16, 1966.
In view of the facts submitted and the representations made by counsel upon the hearing, it does not appear that there is a constitutional...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hyden v. Baker
...Parish Police Jury, 226 F.Supp. 301 (W.D.La.1964). Cf. Blaikie v. Wagner, 258 F.Supp. 364 (S.D. N.Y.1965); Lodico v. Board of Supervisors, 256 F.Supp. 440 (S.D.N.Y.1966). 14 Gomillion v. Lightfoot, 364 U.S. 339, 344-345, 81 S.Ct. 125, 5 L.Ed.2d 110 (1960); Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 17, 7......
-
Abate v. Mundt
...a federal district court required that the county board submit a reapportionment plan to the Rockland County voters, Lodico v. Board of Supervisors, 256 F.Supp. 440 (SDNY). Pursuant to that order, three different plans were devised and submitted to the electorate; but each was rejected at t......
-
O'SULLIVAN v. Mundt
...three-judge court was convened, and the matter was subsequently referred to Judge Croake, whose decision (Lodico v. Board of Supervisors of the County of Rockland, 256 F.Supp. 440, 442, May 20, 1966), declared the County of Rockland to be malapportioned and directed that a plan of reapporti......