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: Raymond Lewis, Petitioner–Appellant, v. New York City Housing Authority, Defendant–Respondent. Index No.
Case No.2019–4762
Community Service Society of New York, New York (Judith M. Whiting of counsel), for appellant.
Lisa Bova–Hiatt, New York City Housing Authority Law Department, New York (Seth E. Kramer of counsel), for respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Lynn R. Kotler, J.), entered April 29, 2019, denying the petition to annul the determination of respondent, dated November 7, 2014, which denied his remaining-family-member status, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
This article 78 proceeding is time-barred, since it was commenced nearly 31/212 years after respondent rendered its decision denying petitioner remaining-family-member status based on a criminal conviction for robbery (see CPLR 217[1]; Matter of Best Payphones, Inc. v Department of Info. Tech. & Telcom. Of City of N.Y., 5 NY3d 30, 34 [2005] ). Petitioner's attempt to frame his request for a new hearing as a motion to vacate fails because his guardian ad litem was in attendance and the hearing decision was not rendered on his default (cf. Matter of Yarborough v. Franco, 95 N.Y.2d 342 [2000] ). Even if this request were to be deemed a motion to vacate, it was made nearly 3
years after the alleged default was entered, and, in any event, petitioner failed to raise this argument below (see Gregory v. Town of Cambria, 69 N.Y.2d 655, 657 [1985] ).
Since the proceeding is time-barred, petitioner's argument that his right to due process was violated cannot be addressed, and, in turn, any alleged due process violations cannot toll the statute of limitations (see Matter of Saunders v. Rhea, 92 AD3d 602, 603 [1st Dept 2012]; see also Matter of Banos v. Rhea, 25 NY3d 266, 279 [2015] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 1225 3
Decided: October 29, 2020
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First 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)