Boxell v. Cornell University

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Boxell v. Cornell University

181 A.D.2d 554

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

DecidedMarch 19, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 181 A.D.2d 554 (Boxell v. Cornell University) 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

Boxell v. Cornell University, 181 A.D.2d 554 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Mos[555]*555kowitz, J.), entered on or about June 10, 1991, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, dismissed the petition as untimely, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

For purposes of CPLR 217, a determination becomes final and binding when the aggrieved party is notified (Matter of Edmead v McGuire, 67 NY2d 714). We agree with the IAS court that petitioner received actual notice of the determination challenged here on December 20, 1989, more than four months before commencement of the proceeding. The notification received by petitioner denying him readmission to respondents’ program did not serve to toll or revive the Statute of Limitations (cf., Gertler v Goodgold, 66 NY2d 946). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Asch, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

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

— Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Mos[555]*555kowitz, J.), entered on or about June 10, 1991, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, dismissed the petition as untimely, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

For purposes of CPLR 217, a determination becomes final and binding when the aggrieved party is notified (Matter of Edmead v McGuire, 67 NY2d 714). We agree with the IAS court that petitioner received actual notice of the determination challenged here on December 20, 1989, more than four months before commencement of the proceeding. The notification received by petitioner denying him readmission to respondents’ program did not serve to toll or revive the Statute of Limitations (cf., Gertler v Goodgold, 66 NY2d 946). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Asch, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

181 A.D.2d 554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boxell-v-cornell-university-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack