Rubin v. City of New York

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Rubin v. City of New York

42 Misc. 2d 598, 248 N.Y.S.2d 463, 1964 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1926

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 27, 1964

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 42 Misc. 2d 598 (Rubin v. City of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rubin v. City of New York, 42 Misc. 2d 598, 248 N.Y.S.2d 463, 1964 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1926 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

By the resolution of the Board of Estimate of the City of New York of December 4, 1958, which established new street and sidewalk widths for 37th Street between Third and Eleventh Avenues, plaintiffs were thereby legally required to remove the encroachments in front of their property. The subsequent resolution of the Board of Estimate of January 26, 1961, in nowise amended or abrogated the resolution of December 4, 1958. The court below erred in holding that it had. The first resolution fixed the street widths; the second authorized the work necessary to achieve the new widths to the extent stated. Nothing- short of a resolution having equal dignity with the resolution of December 4, 1958, could have the effect of rescinding or abrogating that resolution. Plaintiffs’ suit was, therefore, untimely (General Municipal Law, § 50-e; Administrative Code of City of New York, § 394a-1.0).

The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs.

Concur — Tilzer, J. P., Hofstadter and Hecht, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

By the resolution of the Board of Estimate of the City of New York of December 4, 1958, which established new street and sidewalk widths for 37th Street between Third and Eleventh Avenues, plaintiffs were thereby legally required to remove the encroachments in front of their property. The subsequent resolution of the Board of Estimate of January 26, 1961, in nowise amended or abrogated the resolution of December 4, 1958. The court below erred in holding that it had. The first resolution fixed the street widths; the second authorized the work necessary to achieve the new widths to the extent stated. Nothing- short of a resolution having equal dignity with the resolution of December 4, 1958, could have the effect of rescinding or abrogating that resolution. Plaintiffs’ suit was, therefore, untimely (General Municipal Law, § 50-e; Administrative Code of City of New York, § 394a-1.0).

The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs.

Concur — Tilzer, J. P., Hofstadter and Hecht, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 Misc. 2d 598, 248 N.Y.S.2d 463, 1964 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1926, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rubin-v-city-of-new-york-nyappterm-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack