Legal Opinion
Grandinetti v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority
New York Court of Appeals
Decided July 13, 1989PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*787OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Under EDPL 503 (B), a claim required to be made in the Supreme Court (see, EDPL 501 [B]) for damages arising out of the condemnation of real property must be interposed by filing a written claim, demand or notice of appearance "within the time specified by the court.” Contrary to the conclusion of the Appellate Division (139 AD2d 619, 621), the time specified by the court pursuant to this provision is not a Statute of Limitations. Nor is it a condition precedent compliance with which is…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Grandinetti v. Metropolitan Transportation AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
3Cited by5 opinions
- Metropolitan Transportation Authority v. PizzutiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- In re City Tunnel No. 3, Stage 2 (Shaft 22B)Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co. v. Bontrager Realty, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Matter of Village of Haverstraw v. Ray Riv. Co., Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- Town of North Hempstead Community Development Agency v. SavageAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010