In the Matter of Cybul v. Village of Scarsdale
| Decision Date | 11 April 2005 |
| Docket Number | 2004-00725. |
| Parties | In the Matter of BRUCE S. CYBUL et al., Appellants, v. VILLAGE OF SCARSDALE et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.
A party whose interest may be adversely affected by a potential judgment must be made a party in a CPLR article 78 proceeding (see CPLR 1001 [a]; Matter of Martin v Ronan, 47 NY2d 486 [1979]; Matter of Lodge v D'Aliso, 2 AD3d 525 [2003]). The Supreme Court properly, in effect, dismissed the proceeding for failure to timely join the landowner as a necessary party (see Matter of East Bayside Homeowners Assn., Inc. v Chin, 12 AD3d 370 [2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 704 [2005]; Matter of Ferruggia v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Town of Warwick, 5 AD3d 682 [2004]; Matter of Long Is. Pine Barrens Socy. v Town of Islip, 286 AD2d 683 [2001]; Matter of Karmel v White Plains Common Council, 284 AD2d 464, 465 [2001]). The petitioners' failure to adequately explain why they did not name the landowner as a party in the first instance despite being aware of its identity precludes them from proceeding in the landowner's absence (see CPLR 1001 [b]; Matter of East Bayside Homeowners Assn., Inc. v Chin, supra; Matter of Lodge v D'Aliso, supra).
In light of our determination, we need not reach the parties' remaining contentions.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sch. Transparency Org. for Parents v. Harpursville Cent. Sch. Dist.
...meaning of CPLR § 1001(a) since they may be inequitably affected by a potential judgment herein (Matter of Cybul v. Village of Scarsdale, 17 A.D.3d 462, 792 N.Y.S.2d 349 [2d Dept.2005], lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 712, 806 N.Y.S.2d 163, 840 N.E.2d 132 [2005] ; Matter of Brancato v. New York State 5......
-
Sch. Transparency Org. for Parents v. Harpursville Cent. Sch. Dist.
...of CPLR § 1001(a) since they may be inequitably affected by a potential judgment herein ( Matter of Cybul v. Village of Scarsdale, 17 A.D.3d 462, 792 N.Y.S.2d 349 [2d Dept.2005], lv. denied5 N.Y.3d 712, 806 N.Y.S.2d 163, 840 N.E.2d 132 [2005]; Matter of Brancato v. New York State Bd. of Rea......
-
Feder v. Town of Islip Zoning Bd. of Appeals
...Chamber of Commerce v. New York City Bd. of Stds. & Appeals, 49 A.D.3d at 753, 853 N.Y.S.2d 644;Matter of Cybul v. Village of Scarsdale, 17 A.D.3d 462, 463, 792 N.Y.S.2d 349;Matter of East Bayside Homeowners Assn., Inc. v. Chin, 12 A.D.3d 370, 783 N.Y.S.2d 305). As to the fourth factor, a p......
-
Germain v. Town of Chester Planning Bd.
...LLC (hereinafter Chill Factor), is a necessary party to this proceeding (see CPLR 1001[a] ; Matter of Cybul v. Village of Scarsdale, 17 A.D.3d 462, 463, 792 N.Y.S.2d 349 ; Matter of Karmel v. White Plains Common Council, 284 A.D.2d 464, 465, 726 N.Y.S.2d 692 ; Matter of Artrip v. Incorporat......