Legal Opinion · Dissent
In re City of Syracuse Industrial Development Agency
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided September 29, 2006No. Appeal No. 1Published
1Dissent
Hurlbutt, J.P.
(dissenting). I respectfully dissent. In my view, the subject EDPL article 4 proceedings must be dismissed as untimely because they were not commenced within three years “after conclusion of. . . entry of the final order or judgment on judicial review pursuant to [EDPL 207]” (EDPL 401 [A] [3]). I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the proceedings were timely because they were commenced within three years *1335of February 25, 2003, the date on which the Court of Appeals denied the motion for leave to appeal of respondents Kaufmann’s Carousel, Inc. and Lord & Taylor Carousel,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Da Silva v. MussoNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Wolfe v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
- Kaufmann's Carousel, Inc. v. City of Syracuse Industrial Development AgencyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Bell Telephone Co. v. . ParkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1907
- Kravec v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.