TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Vergari v. Marcus

In the Matter of Carl A. Vergari, as District Attorney of Westchester County v. Andrew Marcus

Vergari v. Marcus, 257 N.E.2d 652 (N.Y. 1970)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 18, 1970
Citations
257 N.E.2d 65226 N.Y.2d 764309 N.Y.S.2d 2041970 N.Y. LEXIS 1566

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Memorandum. Cases involving judicial proceedings for forfeiture of penalties were tried by jury before the adoption of the 1846 Constitution (Colon v. Lisk, 13 App. Div. 195 , affd. 153 N. Y. 188 ; see, also, People ex rel. Lemon v. Elmore, 256 N. Y. 489 , 493 ; 4 Lincoln, Constitutional History of New York, p. 50; 44 N. Y. Jur., Penalties and Forfeitures, §§ 7, 16). Therefore, section 2 of article I of the State Constitution guarantees the right to a jury trial in this forfeiture proceeding (Blum v. Fresh Grown Preserve Corp., 292 N. Y. 241, 244 ; Wynehamer v. People, 13 N. Y. 378, 426 ). Lawton v. Steele ( 119 N. Y. 226 , affd. 152 U. S. 133 ), permitting the summary destruction of property of small value in order to abate a nuisance, is not applicable. The instant statute does not prohibit trial by jury; indeed it does not detail any of the proceedings to be followed. Hence it was incumbent on the court to provide the appropriate *766 proceedings, including a jury trial mandated by the Constitution. The Supreme Court deprived respondent of his constitutional right by failing to afford respondent a jury trial. Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Division should be modified and the case remitted to Supreme Court, Westchester County, for a trial by jury.

Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel, Jasen and Gibson concur; Judge Burke taking no part.

Order modified in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1982: 11990: 11993: 11997: 11998: 119822026peak 1982 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State v. One 1990 Honda Accord712 A.2d 1148 (N.J. 1998)
  2. State v. One 1990 Honda Accord695 A.2d 303 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1997)
  3. Swails v. State of Ga.431 S.E.2d 101 (Ga. 1993)
  4. Joch v. Pikulik88 A.D.2d 1023 (1982)
  5. Abrams v. One 1987 Chevrolet Corvette161 A.D.2d 1129 (1990)

Most recent

  1. State v. One 1990 Honda Accord712 A.2d 1148 (N.J. 1998)
  2. State v. One 1990 Honda Accord695 A.2d 303 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1997)
  3. Swails v. State of Ga.431 S.E.2d 101 (Ga. 1993)
  4. Abrams v. One 1987 Chevrolet Corvette161 A.D.2d 1129 (1990)
  5. Joch v. Pikulik88 A.D.2d 1023 (1982)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 7

DepthCaseCited by
Lawton v. Steele, 152 U.S. 133 (1894) 820
Blum v. Fresh Grown Preserve Corp., 54 N.E.2d 809 (N.Y. 1944) 224
Wynehamer v. People, 13 N.Y. 378 (1856) 200
Lawton v. Steele, 23 N.E. 878 (N.Y. 1890) 115
Colon v. Lisk, 47 N.E. 302 (N.Y. 1897) 99
Colon v. Lisk, 13 A.D. 195 (1897) 25
People ex rel. Lemon v. Elmore, 177 N.E. 14 (N.Y. 1931) 23

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list