East Meadow Community Concerts Ass'n v. Board of Ed. of Union Free School Dist. No. 3, Nassau County | Cases | Westlaw

East Meadow Community Concerts Ass'n v. Board of Ed. of Union Free School Dist. No. 3, Nassau County | Cases | Westlaw

View on Westlaw or start a FREE TRIAL today, East Meadow Community Concerts Ass'n v. Board of Ed. of Union Free School Dist. No. 3, Nassau County, Cases
Skip Page Header

East Meadow Community Concerts Ass'n v. Board of Ed. of Union Free School Dist. No. 3, Nassau County

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.October 3, 196626 A.D.2d 819273 N.Y.S.2d 736 (Approx. 2 pages)

East Meadow Community Concerts Ass'n v. Board of Ed. of Union Free School Dist. No. 3, Nassau County

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.October 3, 196626 A.D.2d 819273 N.Y.S.2d 736 (Approx. 2 pages)

26 A.D.2d 819
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
EAST MEADOW COMMUNITY CONCERTS ASSOCIATION, etc., Appellant,
v.
BOARD OF EDUCATION OF UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT #3, COUNTY OF NASSAU, etc., Respondent.
Oct. 3, 1966.
**737 Before BELDOCK, P.J., and UGHETTA, CHRIST, BRENNAN and HILL, JJ.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.
*819 Upon reversal and remittitur by the Court of Appeals (East Meadow Community Concerts Assn. v. Board of Educ., 18 N.Y.2d 129, 272 N.Y.S.2d 341, 219 N.E.2d 172, revg. 25 A.D.2d 850, 269 N.Y.S.2d 542), the decision of this court dated May 2, 1966 (25 A.D.2d 850, 269 N.Y.S.2d 542), is hereby amended to read as follows:
In an action by an unincorporated association to enjoin a district Board of Education from interfering with presentation by plaintiff of a musical concert scheduled for the evening of March 12, 1966 at a stated high school, plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered March 1, 1966, which dismissed the complaint after a nonjury trial.
Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, with costs, and judgment directed in favor of plaintiff (1) declaring that the revocation of the permit by the defendant Board on the ground that the performer was a controversial figure was an unlawful restriction of the constitutional right of free speech and assembly and (2) directing the defendant Board to issue a permit for the performance in question. Findings of fact contained or implicit in the decision and opinion of the court below (49 Misc.2d 643, 268 N.Y.S.2d 221), insofar as they may be inconsistent herewith, are reversed and new findings are made as indicated herein. The date of the performance shall be fixed by agreement of both parties, made within 20 days after entry of the order hereon. In the event that a date cannot be agreed upon within such time, either party may make application to the court below for fixation of the date.
We find that plaintiff is entitled on the merits to the declaratory judgment granted. In our opinion, plaintiff's proposed use of the **738 school facilities was not unlawful (cf. Education Law, s 414, subds. 3, 4). The record discloses that the defendant Board revoked the permit on the sole ground that the performer was a controversial figure, and hence plaintiff is entitled to issuance of a permit for the performance in question on a date satisfactory to both parties.

All Citations

26 A.D.2d 819, 273 N.Y.S.2d 736
End of Document© 2024 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.