Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: John T. SIWULA, Plaintiff-Petitioner-Appellant, v. TOWN OF HORNELLSVILLE and Raymond Kring, Individually and as Superintendent of Highways of the Town of Hornellsville, Defendants-Respondents-Respondents. Daniel Stutzman, Respondent.
Plaintiff appeals from an order denying his application to compel defendants to empanel a jury to consider his application to lay out a private road. We note at the outset that plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus to compel. In the interest of judicial economy, we convert the application to a petition (see CPLR 103[c] ), and we deem the parties to be petitioner and respondents. We conclude that Supreme Court erred in denying the petition in its entirety based on its determination that petitioner's application was incomplete. Highway Law § 300 requires that an application for a private road specify its “width and location, courses and distances, and the names of the owners and occupants of the land through which it is proposed to be laid out,” and the record establishes that petitioner submitted that information in sufficient detail (see Satterly v. Winne, 101 N.Y. 218, 223-224, 4 N.E. 185). Respondents' contention with respect to the necessity of the road and the alternatives available to petitioner are issues of fact to be determined by a jury (see § 301).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the application is converted to a CPLR article 78 petition in the nature of mandamus, the petition is granted in part and respondent Superintendent of Highways of the Town of Hornellsville is directed to comply with Highway Law §§ 301, 302, 304, and 306 forthwith.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: November 21, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)