Opinion
July 27, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Floyd, J.).
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with one bill of costs.
This CPLR article 78 proceeding and two prior proceedings arose out of the same transaction, to wit, the application for preliminary approval of a subdivision plan submitted by the respondent Penlyn Development Corp. (hereinafter Penlyn). They involved the same issues and claims, and sought the same relief. The petitioners were present at all relevant hearings and were parties to both prior proceedings. Moreover, the petitioners, in their opposition papers, admit that their petition, in essence, sought to challenge the Planning Board's determination on the same grounds that the Supreme Court had previously considered and decided in favor of Penlyn. As such, the Supreme Court properly determined that the instant amended petition was barred by the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel (see, O'Brien v. City of Syracuse, 54 N.Y.2d 353, 357; Cornwall Warehousing v. Town of New Windsor, 238 A.D.2d 370).
Mangano, P. J., Copertino, Joy and Florio, JJ., concur.