Legal Opinion

Waterside Associates v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 20, 1988PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

In an article 78 proceeding in the nature of mandamus to compel, the Statute of Limitations commences running when, after a demand, a body or officer " 'refuse[s] * * * to act or to perform a duty enjoined by law’ ” (Matter of De Milio v Borghard, 55 NY2d 216, 220 [quoting Austin v Board of Higher Educ., 5 NY2d 430, 442]). In the present proceeding seeking mandamus to compel, petitioners’ claim is time barred because the proceeding was not commenced within four months from the time of respondent…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. De Milio v. BorghardNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  2. Austin v. Board of Higher EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1959

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Van Aken v. Town of RoxburyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
  2. D.B.S. Realty, Inc. v. New York State Department of Environmental ConservationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  3. Steck v. JorlingAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  4. Karedes v. ColellaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
  5. Meegan v. GriffinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API