Legal Opinion
Sobel v. Higgins
New York Supreme Court
Decided July 1, 1991PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*877OPINION OF THE COURT
Martin Schoenfeld, J.
Motions numbered 1 and 43 on the calendar dated December 10, 1990 are consolidated herein for disposition.
In motion number 1 defendants Richard Higgins (Commissioner of the Department of Housing and Community Renewal [DHCR]) and Robert Abrams (New York State Attorney-General) move pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint against them. In motion number 43 defendant City of New York also moves to have the complaint dismissed as against it.
The instant dispute stems from the fact that plaintiff owns a four-story rowhouse at West 70th Street…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Keystone Bituminous Coal Assn. v. DeBenedictisSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Bowles v. WillinghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Pennell v. City of San JoseSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Petworth Holdings, LLC v. BowserCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- Sobel v. HigginsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- VSF Coalition, Inc. v. ScoppettaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Dawson v. HigginsNew York Supreme Court · 1992
- Petworth Holdings, LLC v. BowserDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2018