In re Noble Drew Ali Plaza Housing Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Noble Drew Ali Plaza Housing Corp.

24 A.D.3d 678, 808 N.Y.S.2d 302

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 19, 2005·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to Not-For-Profit Corporation Law § 511 for leave to sell certain real property, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rosenberg, J.), dated February 19, 2004, which granted the motion of Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York, to vacate a prior order of the same court dated July 31, 2002, granting the petition and authorizing the sale.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The Supreme Court properly vacated the order dated July 31, [679]*6792002, in the interest of justice (see Woodson v Mendon Leasing Corp., 100 NY2d 62 [2003]). Indeed, in his motion, Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York, relied on certain facts that had not been before the court at the time it issued that order, which clearly established that the sale of the property would not promote the purposes of the subject corporation, or its beneficiaries’ interests (see Not-For-Profit Corporation Law § 511 [d]; Rose Ocko Found, v Lebovits, 259 AD2d 685 [1999]).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J.P., Krausman, Spolzino and Lifson, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to Not-For-Profit Corporation Law § 511 for leave to sell certain real property, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rosenberg, J.), dated February 19, 2004, which granted the motion of Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York, to vacate a prior order of the same court dated July 31, 2002, granting the petition and authorizing the sale.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The Supreme Court properly vacated the order dated July 31, [679]*6792002, in the interest of justice (see Woodson v Mendon Leasing Corp., 100 NY2d 62 [2003]). Indeed, in his motion, Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York, relied on certain facts that had not been before the court at the time it issued that order, which clearly established that the sale of the property would not promote the purposes of the subject corporation, or its beneficiaries’ interests (see Not-For-Profit Corporation Law § 511 [d]; Rose Ocko Found, v Lebovits, 259 AD2d 685 [1999]).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J.P., Krausman, Spolzino and Lifson, JJ., concur.

In re Noble Drew Ali Plaza Housing Corp., 24 A.D.3d 678, 808 N.Y.S.2d 302 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

24 A.D.3d 678 (In re Noble Drew Ali Plaza Housing Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related