Opinion
129 Index No. 100205/19 Case No. 2022–04181
04-27-2023
In the Matter of Thomas BRIGHAM, Petitioner-Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY LOFT BOARD et al., Respondents-Respondents.
Thomas Brigham, appellant pro se. Sylvia O. Hinds–Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Diana Lawless of counsel), for City respondents. Norris McLaughlin P.A., New York (Gerard Proefriedt of counsel), for B. Jaffe Real Estate Co. LP, respondent.
Thomas Brigham, appellant pro se.
Sylvia O. Hinds–Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Diana Lawless of counsel), for City respondents.
Norris McLaughlin P.A., New York (Gerard Proefriedt of counsel), for B. Jaffe Real Estate Co. LP, respondent.
Webber, J.P., Moulton, Scarpulla, Mendez, Rodriguez, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Erika M. Edwards, J.), entered March 31, 2022, which denied petitioner's motion to renew his CPLR article 78 petition seeking to, inter alia, annul a temporary certificate of occupancy issued by respondent New York City Department of Buildings (DOB), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court providently exercised its discretion in denying the motion to renew, as the newly discovered facts proffered by petitioner would not have changed the prior determination that the expiration of the temporary certificate of occupancy rendered his request to annul it moot (see CPLR 2221[e][2] ).
Petitioner's challenges to the actions taken by respondent New York City Loft Board related to its rejection of his application for a finding of unreasonable interference and respondents’ notice to DOB approving the issuance of the temporary certificate of occupancy are not properly before this Court on this appeal. Petitioner's failure to prosecute the branch of the proceeding that was previously transferred to this Court (see CPLR 7804[g] ) forecloses him from now raising these arguments (see Matter of E.B. Stimpson Co. v. Jorling, 161 A.D.2d 593, 594, 555 N.Y.S.2d 172 [2d Dept. 1990] ; see also Tregerman v. Auerbach, 111 A.D.3d 503, 504, 974 N.Y.S.2d 442 [1st Dept. 2013] ; Matter of Neroni v. Granis, 121 A.D.3d 1312, 1314, 995 N.Y.S.2d 762 [3d Dept. 2014], appeal dismissed 25 N.Y.3d 957, 8 N.Y.S.3d 254, 30 N.E.3d 897 [2015] ).