Gorman v. Town Board of Town of East Hampton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gorman v. Town Board of Town of East Hampton

289 A.D.2d 491, 735 N.Y.S.2d 421, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12996

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

DecidedDecember 24, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 289 A.D.2d 491 (Gorman v. Town Board of Town of East Hampton) 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

Gorman v. Town Board of Town of East Hampton, 289 A.D.2d 491, 735 N.Y.S.2d 421, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12996 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

In a hybrid action and proceeding pursuant to CPLR 3001 and CPLR articles 78 and 63, inter alia, for a judgment declaring (1) that the environmental review by the Town Board of the Town of East Hampton of a project involving the widening and overlay of the main runway at the East Hampton Airport did not comply with the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and (2) the Town of East Hampton Town Resolution No. 928 of 1997, and the 1994 Airport Layout Plan to be null and void, the appeal, as limited by the appellants’ brief, is from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Kitson, J.), dated September 26, 2000, as denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (2), in effect, to vacate a judgment of the same court dated October 6, 1998, on the ground of newly-discovered evidence.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the appellants’ motion. Contrary to their contentions, all of the claims asserted in the Supreme Court and on this appeal are barred by the doctrine of res judicata based on the decision and order of this Court dated June 5, 2000, in connection with a prior appeal (see, Matter of Gorman v Town Bd., 273 AD2d 235). Goldstein, J. P., McGinity, H. Miller and Townes, JJ., concur.

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

In a hybrid action and proceeding pursuant to CPLR 3001 and CPLR articles 78 and 63, inter alia, for a judgment declaring (1) that the environmental review by the Town Board of the Town of East Hampton of a project involving the widening and overlay of the main runway at the East Hampton Airport did not comply with the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and (2) the Town of East Hampton Town Resolution No. 928 of 1997, and the 1994 Airport Layout Plan to be null and void, the appeal, as limited by the appellants’ brief, is from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Kitson, J.), dated September 26, 2000, as denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (2), in effect, to vacate a judgment of the same court dated October 6, 1998, on the ground of newly-discovered evidence.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the appellants’ motion. Contrary to their contentions, all of the claims asserted in the Supreme Court and on this appeal are barred by the doctrine of res judicata based on the decision and order of this Court dated June 5, 2000, in connection with a prior appeal (see, Matter of Gorman v Town Bd., 273 AD2d 235). Goldstein, J. P., McGinity, H. Miller and Townes, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

289 A.D.2d 491, 735 N.Y.S.2d 421, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12996, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gorman-v-town-board-of-town-of-east-hampton-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack