Curran v. Marcille

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that the Commissioner of the Department of Corrections is among the state’s highest executive officers and entitled to absolute immunity when acting within the scope of their authority
• holding plaintiff failed to present “strong ground” for overcoming effect of § 214(b), and stating that “absent the most clear and unequivocal language, a statute affecting legally existing rights should not be construed to operate retrospectively”
• mentioning vested rights in the context of New York common law on retroactive application of statutes but omitting any such reference in a discussion of § 214(b)(2)
• Court may sustain trial court on any legal ground even though trial court based its decision on another ground
• “statute affecting legally existing rights should not be construed to operate retrospectively” absent clear language to that effect
• Commissioners of Department of Motor Vehicles and Department of Corrections entitled to absolute immunity

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).