In re the Dormitory Authority of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Dormitory Authority of New York

223 A.D.2d 431, 636 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 344

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 18, 1996·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley Parness, J.), entered August 1, 1995, which granted the petition for condemnation of the subject property, with related relief, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Tenants’ challenge to petitioner’s determination was untimely under EDPL 204. The tenants’ claim that this statute’s provision for service by publication is unconstitutional is improperly raised for the first time on appeal and made without the notice to the Attorney-General required by Executive Law § 71 (see, Matter of A & J Produce Corp. v Commissioner of Fin. of City of N. Y., 199 AD2d 99, lv denied 86 NY2d 701). In any event, such claim is without merit (see, Matter of De Vito v City of Troy, 72 AD2d 866). We have considered appellants’ remaining claims and find them to be without merit. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stanley Parness, J.), entered August 1, 1995, which granted the petition for condemnation of the subject property, with related relief, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Tenants’ challenge to petitioner’s determination was untimely under EDPL 204. The tenants’ claim that this statute’s provision for service by publication is unconstitutional is improperly raised for the first time on appeal and made without the notice to the Attorney-General required by Executive Law § 71 (see, Matter of A & J Produce Corp. v Commissioner of Fin. of City of N. Y., 199 AD2d 99, lv denied 86 NY2d 701). In any event, such claim is without merit (see, Matter of De Vito v City of Troy, 72 AD2d 866). We have considered appellants’ remaining claims and find them to be without merit. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

In re the Dormitory Authority of New York, 223 A.D.2d 431, 636 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 344 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

223 A.D.2d 431 (In re the Dormitory Authority of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related