Abstract

This article is meant to accept Chief Judge Kaye's invitation to discuss the New York Court of Appeals' approach to its different cases. It will examine the extent to which the Court of Appeals acts consensually in its plenary caseload and in its effort to resolve particular issues arising under the New York Constitution. Judge Kaye's perception that the Court of Appeals exercises its decision making prerogatives differently in several categories of cases will be explored so that some preliminary assessments about the phenomenon can be made.

Notes

Originally published in Touro Law Review, Vol. 12, pp. 633-675, 1996.

Keywords

state constitutions

Disciplines

Law

Publisher

Touro Law Center

Publication Date

1996

Click button above to open, or right-click to save.

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS