§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Ranco Sand and Stone Corp., Appellant,v.Patrick Vecchio, et al., Respondents.

Brief

24 Cited authorities

  1. Jackson v. New York State Urban Development Corp.

    67 N.Y.2d 400 (N.Y. 1986)   Cited 656 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that failure to raise challenges to FEIS under state environmental law during proceedings could not be overlooked when determining whether failure to discuss issue in FEIS was reasonable

  2. Riverkeeper v. Planning Bd.

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 9064 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 164 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 149. Argued October 18, 2007. Decided November 19, 2007. APPEAL, in the first three above-entitled proceedings, by permission of the Court of Appeals, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, entered August 8, 2006. The Appellate Division (1) reversed, on the law, three judgments (one as to each proceeding) of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Francis A. Nicolai, J.; op 2003 NY Slip Op 50776[U] [Riverkeeper, Inc. v Planning Bd. of Town

  3. In re Eadie v. Town Bd. of N. Greenbush

    2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 5236 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 90 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Upholding a 100-foot buffer zone used to avoid triggering a supermajority vote

  4. Coca-Cola v. Bd. of Estimate

    72 N.Y.2d 674 (N.Y. 1988)   Cited 124 times
    In Coca-Cola, the Board of Estimate improperly gave the DEP the authority to make the final determination as to whether an EIS was required at all for the project at issue therein (ECL 8-0109).

  5. In the Matter of Gordon v. Rush

    100 N.Y.2d 236 (N.Y. 2003)   Cited 77 times
    In Matter of Gordon v. Rush, 100 N.Y.2d 236, 762 N.Y.S.2d 18, 792 N.E.2d 168, the Court of Appeals recognized that there may be circumstances in which the issuance of a positive declaration requiring property owners to prepare and submit a draft environmental impact statement (hereinafter DEIS) itself inflicts actual injury and constitutes a final administrative action ripe for judicial review.

  6. In re East End Prop

    46 A.D.3d 817 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)   Cited 41 times

    No. 2006-08816. December 18, 2007. In a hybrid proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review two determinations of the Long Island Power Authority, both dated December 15, 2005, which, after a hearing, adopted a findings statement pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and authorized Richard M. Kessel, as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Long Island Power Authority, or his designee, to enter into a power purchase agreement and other related agreements with

  7. Pawling Lake Prop. Owners v. Greiner

    72 A.D.3d 665 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)   Cited 35 times
    Noting that a stipulation of discontinuance with prejudice is subject to res judicata

  8. Matter of Sour Mtn. Realty v. New York State Dept. of Envtl. Conservation

    260 A.D.2d 920 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)   Cited 45 times
    In Sour Mountain Realty, the petitioner challenged the issuance by respondent State Department of Environmental Conservation ("DEC") of a positive declaration requiring that petitioner prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement to address the discovery — subsequent to DEC's acceptance of petitioner's draft environmental impact statement — of timber rattlesnakes.

  9. In the Matter of Jones v. Amicone

    27 A.D.3d 465 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)   Cited 33 times

    2004-05795. March 7, 2006. In a hybrid proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent City Council of the City of Yonkers dated June 27, 2003, which adopted a final environmental impact statement pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and a special ordinance enacted October 16, 2003, authorizing and directing the respondent City of Yonkers to acquire certain properties, and an action for a judgment declaring that the respondent City of Yonkers

  10. In re Thorne

    83 A.D.3d 723 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)   Cited 14 times

    No. 2010-00767. April 5, 2011. In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review four determinations of the Village of Millbrook Planning Board, all dated November 12, 2008, which, in relation to a certain development project, issued a negative declaration pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (ECL art 8), and granted a conservation density development special use permit, preliminary site plan approval, and sketch-plan subdivision plat approval, the petitioners appeal from a

  11. Section 617.6 - Initial review of actions and establishing lead agency

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 6 § 617.6   Cited 203 times

    (a) Initial review of actions (1) As early as possible in an agency's formulation of an action it proposes to undertake, or as soon as an agency receives an application for funding or for approval of an action, it must do the following: (i) Determine whether the action is subject to SEQR. If the action is a Type II action, the agency has no further responsibilities under this Part; (ii) Determine whether the action involves a federal agency. If the action involves a federal agency, the provisions