From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ardale v. Keane

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 6, 2001
289 A.D.2d 661 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

89348

December 6, 2001.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (La Buda, J.), entered November 28, 2000 in Sullivan County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, granted respondents' motion to dismiss the petition as time barred.

Charles Ardale, Ogdensburg, appellant pro se.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Allison Penn of counsel), New York City, for respondent.

Before: Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Mugglin and Rose, JJ.


Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a December 21, 1999 determination finding him guilty of violating various prison disciplinary rules. Supreme Court granted respondents' motion to dismiss the petition as barred by the Statute of Limitations. This appeal ensued. In light of the Court of Appeals' decision in Matter of Grant v. Senkowski ( 95 N.Y.2d 605), rendered after Supreme Court's decision, respondents have withdrawn their timeliness objection inasmuch as the record establishes that the petition and affidavit in support of an order to show cause were received by the court clerk and assigned an index number on April 20, 1999, thereby constituting the date of commencement of this proceeding (see, id.; Matter of Thompson v. Selsky, 283 A.D.2d 752). The judgment is therefore reversed and the matter is remitted to Supreme Court to permit respondents to serve an answer within 45 days of this Court's decision.

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, without costs, and matter remitted to the Supreme Court to permit respondents to serve an answer within 45 days of the date of this decision.


Summaries of

Ardale v. Keane

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 6, 2001
289 A.D.2d 661 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Ardale v. Keane

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of CHARLES ARDALE, Appellant, v. JOHN KEANE, as…

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

Date published: Dec 6, 2001

Citations

289 A.D.2d 661 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
733 N.Y.S.2d 647

Citing Cases

Lott v. Goord

By notice dated June 20, 2001, the Court Clerk provided the correct form for poor person relief, however,…

In the Matter of Mercado v. Goord

Respondents now withdraw their objection to the timeliness of the proceeding inasmuch as a further review of…