Bailey v. City Planning Commission of City of Rochester

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bailey v. City Planning Commission of City of Rochester

168 A.D.2d 1006, 564 N.Y.S.2d 948, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16625

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 21, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 168 A.D.2d 1006 (Bailey v. City Planning Commission of City of Rochester) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bailey v. City Planning Commission of City of Rochester, 168 A.D.2d 1006, 564 N.Y.S.2d 948, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16625 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and motion granted. Memorandum: The court erred in denying appellant’s motion to intervene brought pursuant to CPLR 7802 (d) for the purposes of appealing an order granting petitioner’s CPLR article 78 petition. That petition sought to annul respondent’s decision granting appellant’s application for a special use permit. Appellant is an aggrieved party (CPLR 5511), and it was entitled to move to intervene after learning that respondent did not plan to appeal the order (see, e.g., Auerbach v Bennett, 47 NY2d 619, 628). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Cornelius, J.—intervention.) Present—Denman, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and motion granted. Memorandum: The court erred in denying appellant’s motion to intervene brought pursuant to CPLR 7802 (d) for the purposes of appealing an order granting petitioner’s CPLR article 78 petition. That petition sought to annul respondent’s decision granting appellant’s application for a special use permit. Appellant is an aggrieved party (CPLR 5511), and it was entitled to move to intervene after learning that respondent did not plan to appeal the order (see, e.g., Auerbach v Bennett, 47 NY2d 619, 628). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Cornelius, J.—intervention.) Present—Denman, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 A.D.2d 1006, 564 N.Y.S.2d 948, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16625, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bailey-v-city-planning-commission-of-city-of-rochester-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack