Matter of Riolo-Nicol v. City of Rome Zoning Bd. of Appeals
This text of 202 N.Y.S.3d 867 (Matter of Riolo-Nicol v. City of Rome Zoning Bd. of Appeals) 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.
Opinion
| Matter of Riolo-Nicol v City of Rome Zoning Bd. of Appeals |
| 2024 NY Slip Op 00494 |
| Decided on February 2, 2024 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided on February 2, 2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., LINDLEY, OGDEN, AND NOWAK, JJ.
10 CA 22-00033
v
CITY OF ROME ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, CITY OF ROME PLANNING BOARD, ROME CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, ROME CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION, CDS LIFE TRANSITIONS, PASSERO ASSOCIATES, P.C., ET AL., RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.
MARIA LEMMERMAN, JAMES LEMMERMAN, PAULA CAPOCCIA AND LEO CAPOCCIA, PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS PRO SE.
GERARD FEENEY, CORPORATION COUNSEL, ROME (ANGELA TWOMEY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS CITY OF ROME ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, JOHN SORBELLO, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS CHAIRMAN, RAYMOND TUCKER, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS MEMBER, JOSEPH PASQUELTTI, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS MEMBER, JAMES DICASTRO, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS MEMBER, AND MICHAEL BOTTINI, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS MEMBER.
FERRARA FIORENZA PC, EAST SYRACUSE (NICOLE MARLOW-JONES OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS ROME CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT AND ROME CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION.
Appeal from a judgment (denominated order and judgment) of the Supreme Court, Oneida County (David A. Murad, J.), entered March 11, 2021, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment, among other things, denied and dismissed petitioners' first amended petition.
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs as moot (see Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce v Pataki , 100 NY2d 801, 810-811 [2003], cert denied 540 US 1017 [2003]).
Entered: February 2, 2024
Ann Dillon Flynn
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
202 N.Y.S.3d 867, 2024 NY Slip Op 00494, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-riolo-nicol-v-city-of-rome-zoning-bd-of-appeals-nyappdiv-2024.