From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Dukuly v. Aponte

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 19, 1994
204 A.D.2d 189 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

May 19, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick, J.).


Although the order on appeal was a nonfinal order in an article 78 proceeding not appealable as of right (CPLR 5701 [b] [1]), the remand of this matter aggrieves respondent Starrett City, and we accordingly hereby grant leave to appeal sua sponte (see, Nemeroff Realty Corp. v. Kerr, 38 A.D.2d 437, 440, affd 32 N.Y.2d 873). Starrett's appellate contention that the IAS Court was without the authority to remand this matter to DHCR for a hearing is not preserved for appellate review since it was never raised in the IAS Court, and is in any event clearly erroneous since a court has the power under CPLR 7806 to remand a matter to an administrative agency for further proceedings (see, 8 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N.Y. Civ Prac ¶ 7806.01). A remand was appropriate here in view of petitioner's contentions that his sons have stopped their misbehavior at the housing project.

Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Asch, Rubin, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of Dukuly v. Aponte

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 19, 1994
204 A.D.2d 189 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Matter of Dukuly v. Aponte

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of LYSANDER DUKULY, SR., Respondent, v. ANGELO APONTE, as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 19, 1994

Citations

204 A.D.2d 189 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
612 N.Y.S.2d 126

Citing Cases

Thompson v. 490 West End Apartments Corp.

Given these considerations, and "[p]articularly in light of the guiding principle that equity abhors a…

Rehab v. New York City Comm. on Human Rights

tered November 3, 1995, granting petitioner's application pursuant to CPLR article 78 to the extent of…