Lenox Terrace Development Associates v. Riccio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lenox Terrace Development Associates v. Riccio

200 A.D.2d 362, 606 N.Y.S.2d 183

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

DecidedJanuary 4, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 200 A.D.2d 362 (Lenox Terrace Development Associates v. Riccio) 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

Lenox Terrace Development Associates v. Riccio, 200 A.D.2d 362, 606 N.Y.S.2d 183 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered September 18, 1992, which denied the petition seeking to annul the respondents’ determination that petitioner be charged pursuant to Administrative Code of the City of New York § 19-152 for the costs of restoring the defective sidewalks abutting its property, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner failed to comply with Administrative Code § 19-152 requiring that it repair approximately 10,000 square feet of sidewalk. Such failure permitted respondents to engage an independent contractor to complete the work. While the statute has been amended to protect against overbilling by respondents’ contractors, by requiring greater specificity in the notice, petitioner waived the issue for appellate review by not raising it below (Hernandez v Empire Mut. Ins. Co., 121 AD2d 259, 261). Were we to consider the issue reversal would not be warranted since respondents were denied the opportunity to show that the additional work was discovered only by removing portions of the existing sidewalks, and that therefore the cited amendment would have no impact on the result.

We have reviewed petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur — Carro, J. P., Wallach, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered September 18, 1992, which denied the petition seeking to annul the respondents’ determination that petitioner be charged pursuant to Administrative Code of the City of New York § 19-152 for the costs of restoring the defective sidewalks abutting its property, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner failed to comply with Administrative Code § 19-152 requiring that it repair approximately 10,000 square feet of sidewalk. Such failure permitted respondents to engage an independent contractor to complete the work. While the statute has been amended to protect against overbilling by respondents’ contractors, by requiring greater specificity in the notice, petitioner waived the issue for appellate review by not raising it below (Hernandez v Empire Mut. Ins. Co., 121 AD2d 259, 261). Were we to consider the issue reversal would not be warranted since respondents were denied the opportunity to show that the additional work was discovered only by removing portions of the existing sidewalks, and that therefore the cited amendment would have no impact on the result.

We have reviewed petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur — Carro, J. P., Wallach, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 A.D.2d 362, 606 N.Y.S.2d 183, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lenox-terrace-development-associates-v-riccio-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack