Judges: James D. Cole, Assistant Attorney General
Filed Date: 2/13/1992
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
Requestor: Donald J. Swanz, Esq., Village Attorney Village of Franklinville P.O. Box 126 Franklinville, New York 14737
Written by: James D. Cole, Assistant Attorney General in Charge of Opinions
You have asked that we construe the meaning of the term "adjoining" as used in section
Under section 703(1), territory in one or more local governments "adjoining one or more other local governments" may be annexed in accordance with the procedure established by Article 17 of the General Municipal Law. You have presented the following facts for our consideration. The property within the town that is proposed to be annexed by a village is separated from the village by a town highway. You have asked, whether, notwithstanding the town highway, the property proposed to be annexed adjoins the village within the meaning of section
Case law and opinions of this office have found that a highway of another governmental unit separating territory sought to be annexed from the annexing local government would render the territory nonadjoining within the plain meaning of the statute. Matter of Shulman v Wallace,
Other decisions can be distinguished. In Common Council v Town ofJohnstown,
We conclude that town territory proposed to be annexed which is separated from the annexing village by a town highway does not adjoin the village within the meaning of section
The Attorney General renders formal opinions only to officers and departments of the State government. This perforce is an informal and unofficial expression of the views of this office.