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.
Disciplines
Law
Publisher
Touro Law Center
Publication Date
1996
Permanent URL
http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20002646
Recommended Citation
Touro Law Review, Vol. 12, pp. 633-675, 1996.
Notes
Originally published in Touro Law Review, Vol. 12, pp. 633-675, 1996.