Matter of Wooster v. Queen City Landing, LLC

2017 NY Slip Op 3672
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 5, 2017
Docket618 CA 16-02077
StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 3672 (Matter of Wooster v. Queen City Landing, LLC) 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
Matter of Wooster v. Queen City Landing, LLC, 2017 NY Slip Op 3672 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

Matter of Wooster v Queen City Landing, LLC (2017 NY Slip Op 03672)
Matter of Wooster v Queen City Landing, LLC
2017 NY Slip Op 03672
Decided on May 5, 2017
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 May 5, 2017 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, PERADOTTO, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

618 CA 16-02077

[*1]IN THE MATTER OF MARGARET WOOSTER, CLAYTON S. "JAY" BURNEY, JR., LYNDA K. STEPHENS AND JAMES E. CARR, PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS,

v

QUEEN CITY LANDING, LLC, CITY OF BUFFALO PLANNING BOARD AND CITY OF BUFFALO COMMON COUNCIL, RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 2.)


ARTHUR J. GIACALONE, BUFFALO, AND LIPPES & LIPPES, FOR PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS.

HOPKINS SORGI & ROMANOWSKI PLLC, BUFFALO (MARC A. ROMANOWSKI OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT QUEEN CITY LANDING, LLC.

TIMOTHY A. BALL, CORPORATION COUNSEL, BUFFALO (JESSICA M. LAZARIN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS CITY OF BUFFALO PLANNING



Appeal from a judgment (denominated order and judgment) of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Donna M. Siwek, J.), entered November 9, 2016 in this CPLR article 78 proceeding. The judgment granted those parts of respondents' motions to dismiss the claim of petitioners alleging that respondents violated the performance bond provisions of General City Law §§ 27-a (7) and 33 (8) (a).

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Same memorandum as in Matter of Wooster v Queen City Landing, LLC ([appeal No. 1] ___ AD3d ___ [May 5, 2017]).

Entered: May 5, 2017

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

§ 27
New York GCT § 27
§ 431
New York JUD § 431

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2017 NY Slip Op 3672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-wooster-v-queen-city-landing-llc-nyappdiv-2017.