Rochdale Village, Inc. v. New York City Water Board

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rochdale Village, Inc. v. New York City Water Board

18 A.D.3d 664, 795 N.Y.S.2d 671

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

DecidedMay 16, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 18 A.D.3d 664 (Rochdale Village, Inc. v. New York City Water Board) 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

Rochdale Village, Inc. v. New York City Water Board, 18 A.D.3d 664, 795 N.Y.S.2d 671 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CFLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Water Board, dated January 6, 2003, the New York City Water Board appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Taylor, J.), dated January 8, 2004, as granted the petition to the extent of directing it to provide the petitioner with the standard wastewater allowance for the period May 13, 1996, through June 30, 1998.

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

The appellant interprets the applicable rate schedules as requiring the submission of an application for the standard wastewater allowance for the period May 13, 1996, through June 30, 1998. We agree with the Supreme Court that the appellant’s interpretation was irrational and unreasonable (see Matter of Johnson v Joy, 48 NY2d 689, 691 [1979]; Astoria Gas Turbine Power, LLC v Tax Commn. of City of N.Y., 14 AD3d 553 [2005]). Thus, the Supreme Court properly granted the petition to the extent of directing the appellant to provide the petitioner with the standard wastewater allowance for the period May 13, 1996, through June 30, 1998. Adams, J.P., Ritter, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CFLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Water Board, dated January 6, 2003, the New York City Water Board appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Taylor, J.), dated January 8, 2004, as granted the petition to the extent of directing it to provide the petitioner with the standard wastewater allowance for the period May 13, 1996, through June 30, 1998.

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

The appellant interprets the applicable rate schedules as requiring the submission of an application for the standard wastewater allowance for the period May 13, 1996, through June 30, 1998. We agree with the Supreme Court that the appellant’s interpretation was irrational and unreasonable (see Matter of Johnson v Joy, 48 NY2d 689, 691 [1979]; Astoria Gas Turbine Power, LLC v Tax Commn. of City of N.Y., 14 AD3d 553 [2005]). Thus, the Supreme Court properly granted the petition to the extent of directing the appellant to provide the petitioner with the standard wastewater allowance for the period May 13, 1996, through June 30, 1998. Adams, J.P., Ritter, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.3d 664, 795 N.Y.S.2d 671, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rochdale-village-inc-v-new-york-city-water-board-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack