Legal Opinion · Dissent

Knavel v. West Seneca Central School District

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

Decided April 28, 2017Published

1Dissent

NeMoyer and Curran, JJ.

(dissenting). We respectfully dissent. We agree with our colleagues that the “determination to be reviewed” is the decision of respondent West Seneca Central School District (District) embodied in the undated letter sent by the District to petitioners on June 5, 2014 (CPLR 217 [1]). We disagree with our colleagues, however, on the issue whether the record demonstrates that the determination became “final and binding” upon petitioners when the letter was sent (id.). In our view, inasmuch as the nature of the action taken by the District was quasi-legislative, the…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. People v. BerriosNew York Court of Appeals · 1971
  3. Young v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  4. Halperin v. City of New RochelleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  5. Best Payphones, Inc. v. Department of Information Technology & TelecommunicationsNew York Court of Appeals · 2005

16 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