From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stone v. Goldberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 9, 1995
215 A.D.2d 180 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

May 9, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.).


Having failed to exhaust her administrative remedies or commence a CPLR article 78 proceeding, defendant cannot, in this plenary judicial action, collaterally attack the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal's (DHCR) order finding that excessive rent was charged (see, Watergate II Apts. v Buffalo Sewer Auth., 46 N.Y.2d 52). Moreover, defendant's bare assertion that she did not file a Petition for Administrative Review with the agency because she never received the agency's order does not overcome the presumption of receipt raised by the DHCR clerical and mailroom personnel's affidavits setting forth routine office procedures (Woodner Co. v Higgins, 179 A.D.2d 444, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 756).

We have reviewed defendant's constitutional challenges, and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Stone v. Goldberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 9, 1995
215 A.D.2d 180 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Stone v. Goldberg

Case Details

Full title:SHARON STONE, Respondent, v. LAURA GOLDBERG, Appellant

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

Date published: May 9, 1995

Citations

215 A.D.2d 180 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
625 N.Y.S.2d 568

Citing Cases

Thompson v. Fourth Nat. Bank

As between the parties, the maker of a negotiable promissory note may plead any defense available if the note…

Rutherford v. Bee Gee Excelsior Management, Inc.

If plaintiff believed herself entitled to pursue the managing agent, her remedy was to file a PAR from the…