Legal Opinion

Dziedzic v. Kelly

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

Decided September 27, 1988PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Petitioner’s primary argument on appeal is that his Tier III hearing was not commenced in a timely fashion. We find that since the seven-day period for commencing petitioner’s hearing (7 NYCRR 251-5.1 [a]) ended on Veterans’ Day, a public holiday, respondent’s request for an extension of time and the commencement of the hearing on the next succeeding business day was timely (see, General Construction Law § 25-a [1]; cf., People ex rel. Frost v Meloni, 124 AD2d 1032, lv denied 69 NY2d 606; Matter of Picciano v Hammock, 92 AD2d 1043, 1044, lv denied 59…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. MATTER OF COLEMAN v. KellyNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
  2. Coleman v. KellyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
  3. Picciano v. HammockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
  4. People ex rel. Frost v. MeloniAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Persing v. CoughlinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
  2. Maldonado v. CoughlinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API