From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Clemens v. Matera

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 21, 1972
40 A.D.2d 914 (N.Y. App. Div. 1972)

Opinion

November 21, 1972


Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered March 6, 1972 in Rensselaer County, which granted petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to set aside a Coroner's report and directed that a new investigation be conducted. The body of James Clemens was discovered in his apartment on November 9, 1970. The Coroner's physician filed a certificate of death by suicide with the Office of Vital Statistics for the City of Troy on November 10, 1970. An article 78 proceeding was commenced on January 24, 1972 to set aside the report of the Coroner and direct that a new investigation be conducted. Appellant moved to dismiss the petition as barred by the Statute of Limitations. We conclude that the four-month statute commenced to run from the date of the filing of the death certificate. The proceeding was, therefore, not timely commenced and is barred by the Statute of Limitations. Judgment reversed, on the law, and petition dismissed, without costs. Herlihy, P.J., Sweeney, Simons, Kane and Reynolds, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Clemens v. Matera

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 21, 1972
40 A.D.2d 914 (N.Y. App. Div. 1972)
Case details for

Matter of Clemens v. Matera

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of MARGARET CLEMENS, Respondent, v. ANTHONY MATERA, as…

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

Date published: Nov 21, 1972

Citations

40 A.D.2d 914 (N.Y. App. Div. 1972)

Citing Cases

Meserole v. Cnty. of Erie

Even assuming, arguendo, that "[m]andamus to compel lies" here (id.), we conclude that Supreme Court properly…

Leslie Brill Meserole & the Estate v. Cnty. of Erie & Chief Med. Exam'r Tara J. Mahar

. Even assuming, arguendo, that "[m]andamus to compel lies" here ( id. ), we conclude that Supreme Court…