Riverdale Estates v. State of New York Division of Housing & Community Renewal

251 A.D.2d 239, 673 N.Y.S.2d 315, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7711

This text of 251 A.D.2d 239 (Riverdale Estates v. State of New York Division of Housing & Community Renewal) 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
Riverdale Estates v. State of New York Division of Housing & Community Renewal, 251 A.D.2d 239, 673 N.Y.S.2d 315, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7711 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph Giamboi, J.), entered January 21, 1997, which, to the extent appealable, denied petitioner’s motion to renew, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Renewal was properly denied since petitioner’s application was not based upon new factual matter excusably omitted from petitioner’s original submissions (see, Foley v Roche, 68 AD2d 558, 568). Petitioner’s claim that it did not submit reply papers on the original motion because it was unaware that the motion of respondent Division of Housing and Community Renewal, denominated as one to place the case on the calendar, also sought dismissal of the petition, is unavailing. Respondent’s intention to seek the petition’s dismissal was clearly expressed in four separate places in its motion papers, including the notice of motion. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Nardelli and Andrias, JJ.

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

Related

Foley v. Roche
68 A.D.2d 558 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
251 A.D.2d 239, 673 N.Y.S.2d 315, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7711, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/riverdale-estates-v-state-of-new-york-division-of-housing-community-nyappdiv-1998.