From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cohoes Housing Authority v. Ippolito-Lutz, Inc.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Apr 24, 1980
49 N.Y.2d 961 (N.Y. 1980)

Summary

In Cohoes Hous. Auth. v. Ippolito-Lutz, Inc. (49 N.Y.2d 961, affg 65 A.D.2d 666 for reasons stated below), we, like the Appellate Division, rejected the argument that a party could forestall the commencement of the statutory six-month period merely by continuing to pursue discretionary appellate review.

Summary of this case from Lehman Brothers, Inc. v. Hughes Hubbard Reed

Opinion

Argued March 26, 1980

Decided April 24, 1980

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department, JOHN H. PENNOCK, J.

Thomas Dussault for appellant.

Jerrold Morgulas for respondent.


Order affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division ( 65 A.D.2d 666).

Concur: Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER.


Summaries of

Cohoes Housing Authority v. Ippolito-Lutz, Inc.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Apr 24, 1980
49 N.Y.2d 961 (N.Y. 1980)

In Cohoes Hous. Auth. v. Ippolito-Lutz, Inc. (49 N.Y.2d 961, affg 65 A.D.2d 666 for reasons stated below), we, like the Appellate Division, rejected the argument that a party could forestall the commencement of the statutory six-month period merely by continuing to pursue discretionary appellate review.

Summary of this case from Lehman Brothers, Inc. v. Hughes Hubbard Reed

In Cohoes Hous. Auth. v Ippolito-Lutz, Inc. (49 NY2d 961, affg 65 AD2d 666), the Court of Appeals rejected the argument that a party could forestall the commencement of the statutory six-month period merely by continuing to pursue discretionary appellate review.

Summary of this case from Arty v. N.Y.C. Health & Hosps Corp.

In Cohoes Hous. Auth. v Ippolito-Lutz, Inc. (49 NY2d 961, affg 65 AD2d 666), the Court of Appeals rejected the argument that a party could forestall the commencement of the statutory six-month period merely by continuing to pursue discretionary appellate review.

Summary of this case from Arty v. N.Y.C. Health & Hosps Corp.
Case details for

Cohoes Housing Authority v. Ippolito-Lutz, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:COHOES HOUSING AUTHORITY, Appellant, v. IPPOLITO-LUTZ, INC., Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Apr 24, 1980

Citations

49 N.Y.2d 961 (N.Y. 1980)
428 N.Y.S.2d 948
406 N.E.2d 803

Citing Cases

Matter of Julio v. New York St. Bd. of Parole

We reject petitioner's argument that his prior habeas corpus proceeding did not terminate within the meaning…

Malay v. City of Syracuse

We held however, that “[b]y contrast, where an appeal is taken as a matter of right, or where discretionary…