Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Joseph FOLEY, individually and as President of Buffalo Professional Firefighters Association, Inc., Local 282, IAFF, AFL-CIO-CLC, and on Behalf of All Other Individuals Providing Fire Protection to City of Buffalo, Plaintiff-Respondent-Appellant, v. Anthony MASIELLO, Mayor, City of Buffalo, City of Buffalo, Firemen's Pension Fund, Board of Firemen's Pensions, Andrew A. Sanfilippo, Comptroller, City of Buffalo, David Franczyk, President, Common Council of City of Buffalo, and James B. Milroy, Commissioner of Treasury, City of Buffalo, Defendants-Appellants-Respondents.
Plaintiff, individually and as president of the Buffalo Professional Firefighters Association, Inc., Local 282, IAFF, AFL-CIO-CLC (Union), and on behalf of all other individuals providing fire protection to defendant City of Buffalo (City), commenced this action seeking tax revenues (two percent funds) paid to the City and allegedly owed to the Union pursuant to Insurance Law §§ 9104 and 9105. Supreme Court erred in granting plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on liability and instead should have granted defendants' cross motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint. We agree with defendants that, pursuant to those sections of the Insurance Law, the two percent funds are to be paid, inter alia, to the fiscal officer of the fire department of the municipality or the fiscal officer of the municipality, and “the Union has no right to receive a portion of the funds directly from the State” (Watt v. Richardson, 6 A.D.3d 1117, 1118, 776 N.Y.S.2d 418, lv. denied in part and dismissed in part 3 N.Y.3d 735, 786 N.Y.S.2d 808, 820 N.E.2d 287). Defendants therefore established as a matter of law that plaintiff was not entitled to the sole relief sought in the complaint, and plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in response (see generally Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562, 427 N.Y.S.2d 595, 404 N.E.2d 718). In light of our determination, we do not address the parties' remaining contentions.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is denied, the cross motion is granted and the complaint is dismissed.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: June 06, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)