Vinrus Corp. v. Village of Pelham Manor Building Inspector

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vinrus Corp. v. Village of Pelham Manor Building Inspector

66 A.D.3d 690, 885 N.Y.S.2d 644

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

DecidedOctober 6, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 66 A.D.3d 690 (Vinrus Corp. v. Village of Pelham Manor Building Inspector) 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

Vinrus Corp. v. Village of Pelham Manor Building Inspector, 66 A.D.3d 690, 885 N.Y.S.2d 644 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus to compel the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Cacace, J.), entered January 28, 2009, which, upon an order of the same court entered December 23, 2008, granting the respondent’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 and 7804 (f) to dismiss the petition, in effect, dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We affirm the judgment on the ground that the petitioner failed to exhaust its administrative remedies before commencing this proceeding (see Village Law § 7-712-a [5] [b]; Matter of White v Incorporated Vil. of Plandome Manor, 190 AD2d 854 [1993]; see also Matter of Capitol Distribs. Corp. v Jones, 2 Misc 2d 816, 817 [1956]; cf. Matter of Goldberg v Incorporated Vil. of Roslyn Estates, 61 AD3d 756 [2009]).

The parties’ remaining contentions need not be reached in light of our determination. Rivera, J.P., Florio, Miller and Austin, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus to compel the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Cacace, J.), entered January 28, 2009, which, upon an order of the same court entered December 23, 2008, granting the respondent’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 and 7804 (f) to dismiss the petition, in effect, dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We affirm the judgment on the ground that the petitioner failed to exhaust its administrative remedies before commencing this proceeding (see Village Law § 7-712-a [5] [b]; Matter of White v Incorporated Vil. of Plandome Manor, 190 AD2d 854 [1993]; see also Matter of Capitol Distribs. Corp. v Jones, 2 Misc 2d 816, 817 [1956]; cf. Matter of Goldberg v Incorporated Vil. of Roslyn Estates, 61 AD3d 756 [2009]).

The parties’ remaining contentions need not be reached in light of our determination. Rivera, J.P., Florio, Miller and Austin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 A.D.3d 690, 885 N.Y.S.2d 644, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vinrus-corp-v-village-of-pelham-manor-building-inspector-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack