Rome-Floyd Residents Ass'n v. Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conversation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rome-Floyd Residents Ass'n v. Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conversation

105 A.D.2d 1154, 482 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21280

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

DecidedNovember 7, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 105 A.D.2d 1154 (Rome-Floyd Residents Ass'n v. Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conversation) 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

Rome-Floyd Residents Ass'n v. Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conversation, 105 A.D.2d 1154, 482 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21280 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination unanimously confirmed and petition dismissed, without costs. Memorandum: In this CPLR article 78 proceeding petitioner seeks to set aside a determination of respondent Commissioner approving construction and operation of an energy recovery facility in Oneida County near Griffiss Air Force Base. In approving the facility and accepting the county’s environmental impact statement, the Commissioner approved the report made by the administrative law judge following a four-day evidentiary hearing. Although the proceeding was transferred by Special Term to this court pursuant to CPLR 7804 (subd [g]), petitioner raises no substantial evidence question. Rather, petitioner seeks to attack the determination pursuant to CPLR 7803 (subd 3) asserting, inter alia, that it was improperly denied party status pursuant to 6 NYCRR 624.4 (b) (1), (2) on the use of dioxin and that the administrative law judge improperly denied its request for further testimony on dioxin and on the increase of the stack height from 75 feet to 125 feet. Petitioner failed to demonstrate in its briefs to the Commissioner and the administrative law judge that there were questions pertaining to dioxin or the stack height that required further hearings or that it had evidence to present that would cast doubt on the validity of the county’s case. We find that the determinations of the administrative law judge and the Commissioner were entirely reasonable and discern no merit in the other contentions raised in petitioner’s brief. (Article 78 proceeding transferred by order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Roy, J.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Denman, Boomer, Moule, JJ.

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

Determination unanimously confirmed and petition dismissed, without costs. Memorandum: In this CPLR article 78 proceeding petitioner seeks to set aside a determination of respondent Commissioner approving construction and operation of an energy recovery facility in Oneida County near Griffiss Air Force Base. In approving the facility and accepting the county’s environmental impact statement, the Commissioner approved the report made by the administrative law judge following a four-day evidentiary hearing. Although the proceeding was transferred by Special Term to this court pursuant to CPLR 7804 (subd [g]), petitioner raises no substantial evidence question. Rather, petitioner seeks to attack the determination pursuant to CPLR 7803 (subd 3) asserting, inter alia, that it was improperly denied party status pursuant to 6 NYCRR 624.4 (b) (1), (2) on the use of dioxin and that the administrative law judge improperly denied its request for further testimony on dioxin and on the increase of the stack height from 75 feet to 125 feet. Petitioner failed to demonstrate in its briefs to the Commissioner and the administrative law judge that there were questions pertaining to dioxin or the stack height that required further hearings or that it had evidence to present that would cast doubt on the validity of the county’s case. We find that the determinations of the administrative law judge and the Commissioner were entirely reasonable and discern no merit in the other contentions raised in petitioner’s brief. (Article 78 proceeding transferred by order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Roy, J.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Denman, Boomer, Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 A.D.2d 1154, 482 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21280, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rome-floyd-residents-assn-v-commissioner-of-the-department-of-nyappdiv-1984.