Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In Re Williamsburg Independent People, Inc., Etc., Petitioner-Appellant v. Robert B. Tierney

New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts Appellate Division, First Department


January 24, 2012

IN RE WILLIAMSBURG INDEPENDENT PEOPLE, INC., ETC., PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT B. TIERNEY, ETC., RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

Matter of Matter of Williamsburg Ind. People, Inc. v Tierney

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on January 24, 2012

Tom, J.P., Friedman, DeGrasse, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Joan A. Madden, J.), entered October 14, 2010, which granted respondent's cross motion to dismiss the petition seeking a writ of mandamus to compel respondent to present to the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission petitioner's request to landmark the entire site known as the Domino Sugar Refinery, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly dismissed the petition seeking to compel respondent to present petitioner's Request For Evaluation (RFE), since "there is no statutory requirement that [respondent] adhere to a particular procedure in determining whether to consider a property for designation" (Matter of Citizens Emergency Comm. to Preserve Preserv. v Tierney, 70 AD3d 576, 577 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 710 [2010]). Accordingly, the decision as to whether an RFE should be calendered is a discretionary action and thus mandamus to compel is not an available remedy. Moreover, contrary to petitioner's contention, the Landmarks Preservation Commission is not obligated under 63 RCNY 1-02 to hold a public hearing before declining to calendar a request for the property's designation as a landmark (see Matter of Landmark West! v Burden, 15 AD3d 308, 309 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 713 [2005]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: JANUARY 24, 2012

CLERK

20120124

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.