Legal Opinion · Dissent
Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Commissioner of Environmental Conservation
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided July 21, 2011Published
1Dissent
McCarthy, J. (dissenting).
Because Supreme Court correctly dismissed the petition as barred by the doctrine of laches, we dissent and would affirm. As the majority states, in a proceeding seeking mandamus to compel a government official to act, the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the official refuses to take action that the petitioner demanded (see Austin *842v Board of Higher Educ. of City of N.Y., 5 NY2d 430, 442 [1959]; Matter of Mitchell v Essex County Sheriff’s Dept., 14 AD3d 825, 825 [2005]). A petitioner may not circumvent the statute of limitations, however, by waiting…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Austin v. Board of Higher EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1959
- Sheerin v. New York Fire Department Articles 1 & 1B Pension FundsNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Cranesville Block Co. v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- New York Public Interest Research Group v. DinkinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Feldman v. New York State Teachers' Retirement SystemAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.