Redwood Construction Corp. v. Doornbosch

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Redwood Construction Corp. v. Doornbosch

238 A.D.2d 329, 655 N.Y.S.2d 655, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3416

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

DecidedApril 7, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 238 A.D.2d 329 (Redwood Construction Corp. v. Doornbosch) 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

Redwood Construction Corp. v. Doornbosch, 238 A.D.2d 329, 655 N.Y.S.2d 655, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3416 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring the rights of the parties with respect to a certain easement, the defendant West Branch Conservation Association, Inc. appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Bergerman, J.), dated March 20, 1996, as denied that branch of its cross motion which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff Redwood Construction Corp. (hereinafter Redwood), as the contract-vendee of an easement of way across property burdened by a "conservation easement” granted to the defendant West Branch Conservation Association, Inc. (hereinafter West Branch), has standing to challenge the construction and application of the conservation easement to the easement of way which it has contracted to purchase (see, Community Bd. 7 v Schaffer, 84 NY2d 148; Larsen v Incorporated Vil. of Nisseqougue, 192 AD2d 585; Weinstein v Marks, 167 AD2d 704; Bean v Walker, 95 AD2d 70). The argument of West Branch, raised for the first time on appeal, that the Redwood contract for the easement has been cancelled, is not properly before this Court (see, Fischer v Liebman, 137 AD2d 485). In any event, whether or not the Redwood contract was validly cancelled presents a question of fact on this record (see, Poquott Dev. Corp. v Johnson, 104 AD2d 442). Miller, J. P., Ritter, Thompson and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring the rights of the parties with respect to a certain easement, the defendant West Branch Conservation Association, Inc. appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Bergerman, J.), dated March 20, 1996, as denied that branch of its cross motion which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff Redwood Construction Corp. (hereinafter Redwood), as the contract-vendee of an easement of way across property burdened by a "conservation easement” granted to the defendant West Branch Conservation Association, Inc. (hereinafter West Branch), has standing to challenge the construction and application of the conservation easement to the easement of way which it has contracted to purchase (see, Community Bd. 7 v Schaffer, 84 NY2d 148; Larsen v Incorporated Vil. of Nisseqougue, 192 AD2d 585; Weinstein v Marks, 167 AD2d 704; Bean v Walker, 95 AD2d 70). The argument of West Branch, raised for the first time on appeal, that the Redwood contract for the easement has been cancelled, is not properly before this Court (see, Fischer v Liebman, 137 AD2d 485). In any event, whether or not the Redwood contract was validly cancelled presents a question of fact on this record (see, Poquott Dev. Corp. v Johnson, 104 AD2d 442). Miller, J. P., Ritter, Thompson and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 A.D.2d 329, 655 N.Y.S.2d 655, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3416, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/redwood-construction-corp-v-doornbosch-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack