Opinion
January 31, 1994
Appeal from the Court of Claims (Rossetti, J.).
Ordered that the order dated June 4, 1991, is affirmed; and it is further,
Ordered that the appeal from the order dated October 24, 1991, is dismissed; and it is further,
Ordered that the defendant is awarded one bill of costs.
We agree with the Court of Claims that the appellants' claim for damages for the tortious denial of a driveway permit was untimely filed. Thus, it was properly dismissed (see, Court of Claims Act § 10, [3-b]).
In addition, the appellants failed to respond to the defendant's motion to dismiss their claim for damages for a de facto taking of real property, and the Court of Claims granted the defendant's motion on default. Since no appeal lies from an order entered on default of the appealing party, the appeal from the order dated October 24, 1991, must be dismissed (see, CPLR 5511; Matter of Aetna Cas. Sur. Co. v. Serrano, 181 A.D.2d 731; Vasquez v. Koret, Inc., 151 A.D.2d 448; Ghatan v. Fraioli Quigley Moving, 119 A.D.2d 800). Sullivan, J.P., Pizzuto, Joy and Goldstein, JJ., concur.