January 20, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.).
It is axiomatic that the proper vehicle to challenge the final determination of an administrative agency is an article 78 proceeding. The receipt of a water bill constitutes a final and binding determination of the issuing agency (Matter of Miller v McGough, 97 A.D.2d 416). Thus, the IAS Court properly considered the plaintiffs action as an article 78 proceeding and applied the four-month Statute of Limitations (CPLR 217). Because plaintiff failed to commence this action until April 8, 1993, more than four months after its outstanding water and sewer charges were due on June 30, 1992 and August 3, 1992, its claims were time-barred. Plaintiff's unsubstantiated claim that it was improperly billed for these services does not alter this result.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Asch, Rubin, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.