From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Artrip v. Inc. Village of Piermont

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 27, 1999
267 A.D.2d 457 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Submitted December 1, 1999

December 27, 1999

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review certain determinations of the municipal respondents which, inter alia, granted variances and site plan approval for the development of property owned by Paradise Development Corp. and for which Daniel Pullo was the contract vendee, the petitioners appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Sherwood, J.), dated January 12, 1999, which granted Daniel Pullo's motion to dismiss the proceeding for failure to join necessary parties.

Wayne A. Gavioli, Nanuet, N.Y., for appellants.

Dorfman, Lynch Knoebel, Nyack, N.Y. (Dennis A. Lynch of counsel), for respondents Daniel Pullo and Paradise River Development Corp.

Dennis D. Michaels, Deputy Village Attorney, Piermont, N.Y., for the municipal respondents.

SONDRA MILLER, J.P., WILLIAM C. THOMPSON, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, ANITA R. FLORIO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The petitioners failed to join Daniel Pullo and Paradise River Development Corp. as respondents, and it is undisputed that both are necessary parties. Since Paradise River Development Corp. did not voluntarily appear or participate in the proceeding, and since the applicable Statute of Limitations had run, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the proceeding (see, New York City Audubon Society Inc. v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 262 A.D.2d 324 [2d Dept., June 1, 1999]; Matter of Save Our-Open Space v. Planning Bd. of Vil. of S. Nyack, 256 A.D.2d 581 ;Matter of Kam Hampton I Realty Corp. v. Zagata, 251 A.D.2d 665, 666 ).

S. MILLER, J.P., THOMPSON, KRAUSMAN, FLORIO, and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Artrip v. Inc. Village of Piermont

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 27, 1999
267 A.D.2d 457 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Matter of Artrip v. Inc. Village of Piermont

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF JAMES ARTRIP, et al., appellants, v. INCORPORATED VILLAGE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 27, 1999

Citations

267 A.D.2d 457 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
700 N.Y.S.2d 844

Citing Cases

Yaeger v. Town of Lockport Planning

We agree with petitioners that the court erred in granting the motion to dismiss. At the time of the motion,…

Wood v. Vill. of Painted Post

We reject petitioners' contention that the court erred in determining that PPD was a necessary party. Even…