Friscia v. Lem Lee 13th Ltd. Partnership
This text of 37 A.D.3d 168 (Friscia v. Lem Lee 13th Ltd. Partnership) 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.
Opinion
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marylin G. Diamond, J.), entered February 14, 2006, which granted defendants’ motion insofar as to dismiss the complaint seeking declaratory relief by reason of plaintiffs failure to exhaust her administrative remedies, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Inasmuch as the issues raised entail factual determinations in areas within the expertise of the Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR), the motion court properly concluded that judicial review of these matters, if necessary, should await plaintiffs exhaustion of her administrative remedies (see Davis v Waterside Hous. Co., 274 AD2d 318 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 770 [2000]). A declaratory judgment action is not properly utilized to strip DHCR of its primary jurisdiction (see Greystone Mgt. Corp. v Conciliation & Appeals Bd. of City of N.Y., 94 AD2d 614, 616 [1983], affd 62 NY2d 763 [1984]). Concur—Tom, J.P, Andrias, Friedman, Catterson and Kavanagh, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
37 A.D.3d 168, 828 N.Y.S.2d 890, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/friscia-v-lem-lee-13th-ltd-partnership-nyappdiv-2007.