Case Law Boyd v. Hilton

Boyd v. Hilton

Document Cited Authorities (1) Cited in (1) Related

Alicia Boyd and LaShaun Ellis, Brooklyn, NY, appellants pro se.

Sylvia O. Hinds–Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York, NY (Deborah A. Brenner and Jamison Davies of counsel), for respondents.

ANGELA G. IANNACCI, J.P., ROBERT J. MILLER, DEBORAH A. DOWLING, HELEN VOUTSINAS, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In a hybrid proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review a determination of the respondent/defendant Brooklyn Community Board 9 to join as co-applicant in a certain rezoning application and denial by that respondent/defendant of the requests of the petitioners/plaintiffs to produce certain records pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law (Public Officers Law art 6), and action, among other things, for related declaratory relief, the petitioners/plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dawn Jimenez–Salta, J.), dated September 10, 2019. The judgment denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding/action.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioners/plaintiffs (hereinafter the petitioners) commenced this hybrid proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 and action, inter alia, for declaratory relief, seeking, among other things, review of a determination of the respondent/defendant Brooklyn Community Board 9 (hereinafter CB9) to join as co-applicant in a certain rezoning application and CB9's denial of the petitionersrequests to produce certain records pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law (Public Officers Law art 6; hereinafter FOIL). By judgment dated September 10, 2019, the Supreme Court denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding/action. The petitioners appeal.

"[A] proceeding against a body or officer must be commenced within four months after the determination to be reviewed becomes final and binding upon the petitioner" ( CPLR 217[1] ). "A determination is ‘final and binding’ within the meaning of CPLR 217 when ‘the decisionmaker arrives at a definitive position on the issue that inflicts an actual, concrete injury’ " ( Matter of Town of Huntington v. County of Suffolk, 195 A.D.3d 851, 852, 145 N.Y.S.3d 841, quoting Stop–The–Barge v. Cahill, 1 N.Y.3d 218, 223, 771 N.Y.S.2d 40, 803 N.E.2d 361 [internal quotation marks omitted]). Here, so much of the petition/complaint filed in December 2018 as challenged CB9's determination to join as co-applicant in the rezoning application, which was made on November 22, 2016, was untimely (see Matter of Town of Huntington v....

2 cases
Document | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division – 2023
Badal v. Wilkinson
"..."
Document | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division – 2023
Alleyne v. Rutland Dev. Grp., Inc.
"..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
2 cases
Document | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division – 2023
Badal v. Wilkinson
"..."
Document | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division – 2023
Alleyne v. Rutland Dev. Grp., Inc.
"..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex