Klein v. Barrios-Paoli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Klein v. Barrios-Paoli

237 A.D.2d 165, 655 N.Y.S.2d 367, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2673

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

DecidedMarch 18, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 237 A.D.2d 165 (Klein v. Barrios-Paoli) 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

Klein v. Barrios-Paoli, 237 A.D.2d 165, 655 N.Y.S.2d 367, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2673 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Order [166]*166and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Edith Miller, J.), entered February 16, 1996, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 challenging the rating guide used by respondents to grade the oral portion of Civil Service Examination No. 8564 for promotion to Battalion Chief, granted respondents’ motion to dismiss the petition as barred by res judicata, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The petition was properly dismissed since the claims raised therein were either raised or could have been raised in Matter of Spadafora v White (Sup Ct, NY County, Aug. 24, 1995, Miller, J., index No. 8058/91), to which all petitioners herein were parties (see, Hyman v Hillelson, 79 AD2d 725, affd 55 NY2d 624). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger and Rubin, JJ.

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

Order [166]*166and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Edith Miller, J.), entered February 16, 1996, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 challenging the rating guide used by respondents to grade the oral portion of Civil Service Examination No. 8564 for promotion to Battalion Chief, granted respondents’ motion to dismiss the petition as barred by res judicata, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The petition was properly dismissed since the claims raised therein were either raised or could have been raised in Matter of Spadafora v White (Sup Ct, NY County, Aug. 24, 1995, Miller, J., index No. 8058/91), to which all petitioners herein were parties (see, Hyman v Hillelson, 79 AD2d 725, affd 55 NY2d 624). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

237 A.D.2d 165, 655 N.Y.S.2d 367, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2673, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/klein-v-barrios-paoli-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack