1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.3d
  4. 60 A.D.3d
  5. 60 A.D.3d 435 (2009)
 

PERDOMO v. MORGENTHAU

60 A.D.3d 435 (2009)

874 N.Y.S.2d 443

RAMONA PERDOMO, Respondent, v. ROBERT MORGENTHAU, as District Attorney, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.

Decided March 5, 2009.

A court's primary consideration "when presented with a question of statutory interpretation . . . is to ascertain and give effect to the intention of the Legislature" (Matter of Daimler-Chrysler Corp. v Spitzer, 7 N.Y.3d 653, 660 [2006] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]). Legislative intent, in turn, is most clearly indicated by unambiguous statutory text, which courts...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases