Ehlers Real Estate Holding, LLC v. Foley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ehlers Real Estate Holding, LLC v. Foley

63 A.D.3d 834, 880 N.Y.S.2d 503

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

DecidedJune 9, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 63 A.D.3d 834 (Ehlers Real Estate Holding, LLC v. Foley) 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

Ehlers Real Estate Holding, LLC v. Foley, 63 A.D.3d 834, 880 N.Y.S.2d 503 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review a comprehensive land use plan for the Town of Brookhaven, the petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Costello, J.), dated April 14, 2008, which granted that branch of the respondents’ motion which was to dismiss the petition on the ground that it was not ripe for judicial review, denied the petition, and, in effect, dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the respondents’ motion which was to dismiss the petition on the ground that it was not ripe for judicial review (see Matter of Gordon v Rush, 100 NY2d 236, 242 [2003]; Matter of Pirog v [835]*835Cockburn, 34 AD3d 819, 820 [2006]; Matter of Alamit Props. Co. v Planning Bd. of Town of Harrison, 159 AD2d 703, 704 [1990]). Spolzino, J.P., Covello, Angiolillo and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review a comprehensive land use plan for the Town of Brookhaven, the petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Costello, J.), dated April 14, 2008, which granted that branch of the respondents’ motion which was to dismiss the petition on the ground that it was not ripe for judicial review, denied the petition, and, in effect, dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the respondents’ motion which was to dismiss the petition on the ground that it was not ripe for judicial review (see Matter of Gordon v Rush, 100 NY2d 236, 242 [2003]; Matter of Pirog v [835]*835Cockburn, 34 AD3d 819, 820 [2006]; Matter of Alamit Props. Co. v Planning Bd. of Town of Harrison, 159 AD2d 703, 704 [1990]). Spolzino, J.P., Covello, Angiolillo and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 A.D.3d 834, 880 N.Y.S.2d 503, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ehlers-real-estate-holding-llc-v-foley-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack