Barklee Realty Co. LLC v. Bloomberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Barklee Realty Co. LLC v. Bloomberg

63 A.D.3d 479, 879 N.Y.S.2d 711

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

DecidedJune 9, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 63 A.D.3d 479 (Barklee Realty Co. LLC v. Bloomberg) 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

Barklee Realty Co. LLC v. Bloomberg, 63 A.D.3d 479, 879 N.Y.S.2d 711 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles J. Tejada, J.), entered November 23, 2007, which denied the petition seeking, inter aha, to vacate respondent Environmental Control Board’s rejection of petitioners’ appeal and dismissed the proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Board’s rejection of petitioners’ appeal from a decision [480]*480that imposed fines for their failure to certify the correction of violations noticed by respondent Fire Department was not arbitrary and capricious. Contrary to petitioners’ contention, the notices of violation were reasonably calculated to apprise petitioners of the rules violated and to afford them an opportunity to be heard and to present their objections at the Board hearing. We have reviewed petitioners’ remaining contentions and find them without merit. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Sweeny, DeGrasse, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles J. Tejada, J.), entered November 23, 2007, which denied the petition seeking, inter aha, to vacate respondent Environmental Control Board’s rejection of petitioners’ appeal and dismissed the proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Board’s rejection of petitioners’ appeal from a decision [480]*480that imposed fines for their failure to certify the correction of violations noticed by respondent Fire Department was not arbitrary and capricious. Contrary to petitioners’ contention, the notices of violation were reasonably calculated to apprise petitioners of the rules violated and to afford them an opportunity to be heard and to present their objections at the Board hearing. We have reviewed petitioners’ remaining contentions and find them without merit. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Sweeny, DeGrasse, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 A.D.3d 479, 879 N.Y.S.2d 711, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barklee-realty-co-llc-v-bloomberg-nyappdiv-2009.