Carriage Hill, Inc. v. Lane

20 A.D.2d 914, 249 N.Y.S.2d 455, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4002
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 20, 1964
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 20 A.D.2d 914 (Carriage Hill, Inc. v. Lane) 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
Carriage Hill, Inc. v. Lane, 20 A.D.2d 914, 249 N.Y.S.2d 455, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4002 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Opinion

In a proceeding under article 78 of the former Civil Practice Act, to compel the respondent, Building Inspector of the Town of Poughkeepsie, to issue to the petitioner a permit for the construction of certain multiple dwelling buildings, the petitioner, by permission, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated September 13, 1963, which granted the motion by an owner of a neighboring single-family dwelling and by 125 other named persons: (a) to intervene as parties; and (b) to make a motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that the court does not have jurisdiction, and for other and alternative relief. Order reversed, without costs, and motion denied, without prejudice to renewal upon proper papers and proof as indicated herein. The court has no power to grant leave to intervene where, as here, the prosepeetive interveners did not include in their motion papers “a proposed pleading setting forth the claim or defense for which intervention is sought” (CPLR 1014; see, also, former Civ. Prac. Act, § 193-b, subd. 3). Furthermore, almost all the applicants for intervention failed to show how the granting of the relief requested in the petition would cause them to suffer any special or unique damage not shared by other property owners in the community. In the absence of such proof, a property owner is not entitled to intervene as a party (Matter of Glenel Realty Corp. v. Worthington, 4 A D 2d 702, app. dsmd. 3 N Y 2d 924). Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Landa v. Poloncarz
187 N.Y.S.3d 283 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
New Hope Missionary Baptist Church, Inc. v. 466 Lafayette Ltd.
2019 NY Slip Op 1083 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Zehnder v. State
266 A.D.2d 224 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Serdaroglu v. Serdaroglu
209 A.D.2d 608 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Rozewicz v. Ciminelli
116 A.D.2d 990 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
Colonial Sand & Stone Co. v. Flacke
75 A.D.2d 894 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 A.D.2d 914, 249 N.Y.S.2d 455, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4002, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carriage-hill-inc-v-lane-nyappdiv-1964.