N. Picco & Sons Contracting, Inc. v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

N. Picco & Sons Contracting, Inc. v. Smith

77 A.D.3d 668, 908 N.Y.S.2d 367

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

DecidedOctober 5, 2010

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 77 A.D.3d 668 (N. Picco & Sons Contracting, Inc. v. Smith) 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

N. Picco & Sons Contracting, Inc. v. Smith, 77 A.D.3d 668, 908 N.Y.S.2d 367 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 and Labor Law § 220 (8) to review a determination and order of the Acting [669]*669Commissioner of the New York State Department of Labor dated August 11, 2009, which adopted the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations of a hearing officer, made after a hearing, inter alia, that the petitioner N. Picco and Sons Contracting, Inc., willfully failed to pay certain employees prevailing wages and supplements on four public works projects.

Adjudged that the proceeding is dismissed, with costs.

The petitioners commenced the instant proceeding more than 30 days after service upon them of the notice of the filing of the challenged determination and order in the office of the fiscal officer of the appropriate governmental entity, here, the Office of the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Labor. Under such circumstances, the proceeding is time-barred (see Labor Law § 220 [8]; Matter of Local 237, Intl. Bhd. of Teamsters v Comptroller of City of N.Y., 259 AD2d 314 [1999]; Bolovis v Polis Contr. Corp., 235 AD2d 323, 323 [1997]; cf. CPLR 217 [1]; Matter of Edmead v McGuire, 67 NY2d 714, 716 [1986]; Matter of Lion Constr. Corp. v New York State Dept. of Labor, 266 AD2d 394, 394-395 [1999]), and must be dismissed.

In light of the foregoing, we need not reach the merits of the petitioners’ contentions. Mastro, J.P., Santucci, Roman and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 and Labor Law § 220 (8) to review a determination and order of the Acting [669]*669Commissioner of the New York State Department of Labor dated August 11, 2009, which adopted the findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations of a hearing officer, made after a hearing, inter alia, that the petitioner N. Picco and Sons Contracting, Inc., willfully failed to pay certain employees prevailing wages and supplements on four public works projects.

Adjudged that the proceeding is dismissed, with costs.

The petitioners commenced the instant proceeding more than 30 days after service upon them of the notice of the filing of the challenged determination and order in the office of the fiscal officer of the appropriate governmental entity, here, the Office of the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Labor. Under such circumstances, the proceeding is time-barred (see Labor Law § 220 [8]; Matter of Local 237, Intl. Bhd. of Teamsters v Comptroller of City of N.Y., 259 AD2d 314 [1999]; Bolovis v Polis Contr. Corp., 235 AD2d 323, 323 [1997]; cf. CPLR 217 [1]; Matter of Edmead v McGuire, 67 NY2d 714, 716 [1986]; Matter of Lion Constr. Corp. v New York State Dept. of Labor, 266 AD2d 394, 394-395 [1999]), and must be dismissed.

In light of the foregoing, we need not reach the merits of the petitioners’ contentions. Mastro, J.P., Santucci, Roman and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

77 A.D.3d 668, 908 N.Y.S.2d 367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/n-picco-sons-contracting-inc-v-smith-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack