Case Name: Rezplex, L.L.C., Respondent, v. New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development et al., Appellants
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2011-06-28
Citations: 17 N.Y.3d 779
Docket Number: 
Parties: Rezplex, L.L.C., Respondent, v New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 17
Pages: 779–781

Head Matter:
[952 NE2d 1075, 929 NYS2d 81]
Rezplex, L.L.C., Respondent, v New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development et al., Appellants.
Decided June 28, 2011
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Larry A. Sonnenshein of counsel), for appellants.
Goodman & Leopold, L.L.P., New York City (Howard B. Leopold of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and its certified question answered in the affirmative.
Petitioner's nonownership of the property where the City repaired a collapsing retaining wall was adequately raised in petitioner's December 11, 2001 protest, which stated: "We are not aware of any emergency repair done at [petitioner's] premises." Thus we need not decide whether the issue was one that could be raised for the first time after the administrative ruling.
Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur in memorandum.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, etc.