Case ID: ny-2d_56/html/0985-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In the Matter of Rye Town/King Civic Association et al., Appellants, v Town of Rye, Respondent. Atrium Associates, Intervenor-Respondent.
    
      Submitted April 19, 1982;
    decided June 17, 1982
    
      APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      J. Henry Neale, Jr., for appellants.
    
      Daniel J. Pykett for respondent.
    
      Daniel G. Donovan for intervenor-respondent.
   opinion of the court

Memorandum.

The motion for leave to appeal should be dismissed as untimely.

A party who has mistaken the method for obtaining appellate review is entitled to a 30-day extension of time within which to pursue the proper method of appeal (CPLR 5514, subd [a]). In such circumstances, however, an adverse party who initially did not either appeal as of right under CPLR 5513 (subd [a]), or move for leave to appeal under CPLR 5513 (subd [b]), or cross-appeal or cross-move for leave to appeal under CPLR 5513 (subd [c]), may not avail itself of the 10-day extension provided by CPLR 5513 (subd [c]).

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed in a memorandum, with twenty dollars costs and necessary reproduction disbursements to intervenor-respondent.