Case ID: ad2d_1/html/0999-07.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 Bernard Colodney et al., Respondents, against New York Coffee and Sugar Exchange, Inc., Appellant.
   This proceeding brought under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act is barred by the Statute of Limitations (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1286). The petition patently demonstrates that the proceeding was begun more than four months after a determination by respondent censuring petitioners for improper business conduct (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1293; Matter of Mahony v. Conway, 281 App. Div. 1057; Matter of Endig v. McGoldrick, 282 App. Div. 677). The determination involved the exercise of discretion and judgment encompassed by subdivision 2 of section 1284 of the Civil Practice Act, and cannot be reviewed for alleged arbitrariness after the lapse of the four months’ period of its effective date (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1286; Matter of Foy v. Brennan, 285 App. Div. 669; Matter of Weldon v. Rheinstein, 283 N. Y. 753). Order unanimously reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellant and the petition dismissed. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Botein, Cox, Frank and Valente, JJ. [1 Misc 2d 643.]