From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hicks v. City of Poughkeepsie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 29, 2002
293 A.D.2d 711 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-02635

Submitted April 4, 2002.

April 29, 2002.

In an action to set aside the conveyance of a deed to a parcel of real property, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.), dated January 17, 2001, which denied her motion to vacate the sale of the subject property and granted the cross motion of the defendant City of Poughkeepsie to dismiss the complaint.

Corbally, Gartland Rappleyea, LLP, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Jon H. Adams of counsel), for appellant.

Van Dewater Van Dewater, LLP, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (James E. Nelson and Beth L. Sims of counsel), for respondents.

Before: ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, HOWARD MILLER, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the notice provided by the defendant City of Poughkeepsie of the impending tax sale of her property complied with due process (see Kennedy v. Mossafa, 291 A.D.2d 378 [2d Dept, Feb. 4, 2002]; Matter of 380 Front St. No. 20 Corp. v. County of Dutchess, 264 A.D.2d 739).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.

FLORIO, J.P., SMITH, LUCIANO and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hicks v. City of Poughkeepsie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 29, 2002
293 A.D.2d 711 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Hicks v. City of Poughkeepsie

Case Details

Full title:BRENDA HICKS, appellant, v. CITY OF POUGHKEEPSIE, ET AL., respondents

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

Date published: Apr 29, 2002

Citations

293 A.D.2d 711 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
741 N.Y.S.2d 424

Citing Cases

Salvation Praise Del. v. Ass. B.A.

The City's acquisition of the subject property was proper and met all the requirements of due process.…