Opinion
2014-06725, Index No. 30452/14.
04-22-2015
PREMIER RESTORATIONS OF NEW YORK CORP., appellant, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, respondent.
H. Scott Ziemelis, Middletown, N.Y., for appellant. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Michael S. Belohlavek and Karen W. Lin of counsel), for respondent.
H. Scott Ziemelis, Middletown, N.Y., for appellant.
Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Michael S. Belohlavek and Karen W. Lin of counsel), for respondent.
Opinion
In a declaratory judgment action, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Alfieri, Jr., J.), dated June 13, 2014, which granted the defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) and CPLR 3001 to dismiss the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
An action for a declaratory judgment must be supported by the existence of a justiciable controversy (see CPLR 3001 ; Long Is. Light. Co. v. Allianz Underwriters Ins. Co., 35 A.D.3d 253, 826 N.Y.S.2d 55 ; Tri–State Sol–Aire Corp. v. County of Nassau, 156 A.D.2d 555, 548 N.Y.S.2d 810 ). There must be a genuine, concrete dispute between adverse parties, not merely the possibility of hypothetical, contingent, or remote prejudice to the plaintiff (see Chanos v. MADAC, LLC, 74 A.D.3d 1007, 1008, 903 N.Y.S.2d 506 ; Waterways Dev. Corp. v. Lavalle, 28 A.D.3d 539, 540, 813 N.Y.S.2d 485 ).
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, it failed to allege the existence of a justiciable controversy in this case, relying instead upon a hypothetical injury which would be contingent upon the occurrence of events which may or may not come to pass at some point in the future. Accordingly, the plaintiff sought an impermissible advisory opinion, and the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the complaint (see generally Church of St. Paul & St. Andrew v. Barwick, 67 N.Y.2d 510, 505 N.Y.S.2d 24, 496 N.E.2d 183 ; Self–Insurer's Assn. v. State Indus.
Commn., 224 N.Y. 13, 119 N.E. 1027 ; Waterways Dev. Corp. v. Lavalle, 28 A.D.3d 539, 813 N.Y.S.2d 485 ; Matter of United Water New Rochelle v. City of New York, 275 A.D.2d 464, 712 N.Y.S.2d 637 ).
MASTRO, J.P., RIVERA, DICKERSON and MALTESE, JJ., concur.