Kelly v. New York City Police Department

286 A.D.2d 581, 730 N.Y.S.2d 84, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8330
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedSeptember 6, 2001
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 286 A.D.2d 581 (Kelly v. New York City Police Department) 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
Kelly v. New York City Police Department, 286 A.D.2d 581, 730 N.Y.S.2d 84, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8330 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Franklin Weiss-berg, J.), entered July 17, 2000, which granted respondent’s cross motion to dismiss as time barred the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article .78 to challenge respondent’s denial of petitioner’s Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

On June 6, 1997, respondent partially denied petitioner’s request for documents leading to his indictment. That determination was final and binding upon petitioner and commenced the running of the applicable four-month limitations period (CPLR 217). Petitioner’s second request, dated June 23, 1999, was duplicative of his prior request, and therefore did not extend or toll his time to commence an article 78 proceeding, after petitioner’s first article 78 proceeding challenging the partial denial of his first request was dismissed for failure to file proof of service (see, Matter of Mendez v New York City Police Dept., 260 AD2d 262; see also, Matter of Edwards v New York City Employees’ Retirement Sys., 190 AD2d 545). Accordingly, since this second article 78 proceeding, identical to petitioner’s first article 78 proceeding, was not commenced by petitioner within the time allowed by CPLR former 306-b, then applicable, or within the six-month extension provided pursuant to CPLR 205 (a) (see, Matter of Hicks v City of New York, 247 AD2d 342), the proceeding was properly dismissed as untimely. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Saxe and Friedman, JJ.

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

Related

Hyland v. New York City Fire Dept.
2024 NY Slip Op 33395(U) (New York Supreme Court, New York County, 2024)
Matter of Jewish Press, Inc. v. New York City Dept. of Hous. Preserv. & Dev.
2021 NY Slip Op 02222 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Matter of United Probation Officers Assn. v. City of New York
2020 NY Slip Op 05476 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Matter of Stankevich v. New York City Police Dept.
2019 NY Slip Op 4767 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Matter of Walker v. Roque
137 A.D.3d 643 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of Subervi v. Federation of State Med. Bds.
136 A.D.3d 553 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of Cross v. Russo
132 A.D.3d 454 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Andrade v. New York City Police Department
106 A.D.3d 520 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Pennington v. Clark
1 A.D.2d 912 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Greene v. City of New York
196 Misc. 2d 125 (New York Supreme Court, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
286 A.D.2d 581, 730 N.Y.S.2d 84, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelly-v-new-york-city-police-department-nyappdiv-2001.