GVC II, Inc. v. Contract Dispute Resolution Board

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

GVC II, Inc. v. Contract Dispute Resolution Board

13 A.D.3d 254, 785 N.Y.S.2d 920, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15486

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

DecidedDecember 21, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 13 A.D.3d 254 (GVC II, Inc. v. Contract Dispute Resolution Board) 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

GVC II, Inc. v. Contract Dispute Resolution Board, 13 A.D.3d 254, 785 N.Y.S.2d 920, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15486 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered April 16, 2004, which granted the petition challenging cancellation of petitioner’s contract with respondent Department of Transportation and remanded the [255]*255matter to respondent Contract Dispute Resolution Board, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

While Supreme Court misstated the applicable law in dicta, the court’s order gave the City and its agency each and every element of the relief they sought. Accordingly, the municipal respondents were not aggrieved within the meaning of CPLR 5511 (see Parochial Bus Sys. v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 60 NY2d 539 [1983]). Concur—Tom, J.P, Mazzarelli, Saxe, Sullivan and Friedman, JJ.

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

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered April 16, 2004, which granted the petition challenging cancellation of petitioner’s contract with respondent Department of Transportation and remanded the [255]*255matter to respondent Contract Dispute Resolution Board, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

While Supreme Court misstated the applicable law in dicta, the court’s order gave the City and its agency each and every element of the relief they sought. Accordingly, the municipal respondents were not aggrieved within the meaning of CPLR 5511 (see Parochial Bus Sys. v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 60 NY2d 539 [1983]). Concur—Tom, J.P, Mazzarelli, Saxe, Sullivan and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A.D.3d 254, 785 N.Y.S.2d 920, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15486, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gvc-ii-inc-v-contract-dispute-resolution-board-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack