Court Opinion

ID: 9942820
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-21 21:08:57.723876+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:44:45.324749
License: Public Domain

Montano v New York City Dept. of Homeless Servs.
               2024 NY Slip Op 30501(U)
                   February 15, 2024
           Supreme Court, New York County
        Docket Number: Index No. 157326/2023
                  Judge: Sabrina Kraus
Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
 Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York
 State and local government sources, including the New
  York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service.
 This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official
                       publication.
                                                                                                                      INDEX NO. 157326/2023
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31                                                                                            RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/15/2024

                                   SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
                                             NEW YORK COUNTY
            PRESENT:             HON. SABRINA KRAUS                                               PART                             57M
                                                                                      Justice
            ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------X
                                                                                                  INDEX NO.          157326/2023
             RALDY MONTANO
                                                                                                                     07/26/2023,
                                                         Plaintiff,                               MOTION DATE        11/17/2023

                                                 - V -
                                                                                                  MOTION SEQ. NO. _ _0_0_1_0_0_2__

             NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF HOMELESS
             SERVICES,                                                                              DECISION + ORDER ON
                                                                                                          MOTION
                                                         Defendant.
            ------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------X

            The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,
            11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 29
            were read on this motion to/for                                             ARTICLE 78 (BODY OR OFFICER)

            The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 002) 23, 24, 25, 26, 27,
            28
            were read on this motion to/for                                            INJUNCTION/RESTRAINING ORDER

                                                         BACKGROUND

                      Petitioner brings this special proceeding seeking to prevent the construction and

            operation of a shelter for homeless adults that is planned for the Inwood neighborhood in upper

            Manhattan. Petitioner argues that the environmental review prepared by DHS for the project was

            inadequate, and that further review should be required. Petitioner also focuses on the presence of

            a nearby elementary school which is eligible for landmark status, and the fact that the site of the

            planned shelter is the former location of a burial ground for enslaved peoples and also has

            significance to Native Americans. Due to these elements, Petitioner also alleges that the plan

            violates the New York State Historic Preservation Act.

                      Respondent argues that the petition is time barred.

             157326/2023 MONTANO, RALDY vs. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF HOMELESS                                      Page 1 of4
             SERVICES
             Motion No. 001 002

                                                                            1 of 4
[* 1]
                                                                                                   INDEX NO. 157326/2023
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31                                                                       RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/15/2024

                   For the reasons stated below, the petition and order to show cause seeking a preliminary

            injunction are denied and the cross-motion to dismiss the proceeding as time barred is granted.

                                                   DISCUSSION

                    "In moving to dismiss an action as barred by the statute of limitations, the defendant

            bears the initial burden of demonstrating, prima facie, that the time within which to commence

            the cause of action has expired." MTGLQ Invs., LP v. Wozencraft, 172 A.D.3d 644, 644 (1st

            Dep't 2019); see also New York City School Constr. Auth. v. Ennead Architects LLP, 148 A.D.3d

            618 (1st Dep't 2017). In an Article 78 proceeding, CPLR §217(1) requires a petitioner to

            commence their action "within four months after the determination to be reviewed becomes final

            and binding upon the petitioner." See Banos v. Rhea, 25 N.Y.3d 266,276 (2015).

                   To determine when an action is final, consideration "must be given to the completeness

            of the administrative action" and whether "the decisionmaker has arrived at a definitive position

            on the issue that inflicts an actual, concrete injury." Essex County v. Zagata, 91 N.Y.2d 447, 453

            ( 1998). If further administrative action might prevent or ameliorate the injury purportedly

            inflicted by the challenged determination, an action is not final and binding. Walton v. New York

            State Dept. of Correctional Servs., 6 N.Y.3d 186, 195 (2007) (agency's determination underlying

            a contract with a private provider becomes final and binding when the contract is approved).

                   Petitioner challenges the determination of DHS to contract for operation of a homeless

            shelter at the site, and DHS arrived at a definitive position on that issue when it entered into

            contract and the terms of the contract became final and binding upon the parties. DHS entered

            into a contract with Bowery Residents Committee ("BRC") for operation of this shelter on

            October 19, 2021. On January 5, 2022, DHS submitted the contract to the Comptroller for

            registration, with said registration occurring on January 31, 2022. Upon registration, the contract

             157326/2023 MONTANO, RALDY vs. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF HOMELESS                    Page 2 of 4
             SERVICES
             Motion No. 001 002

                                                           2 of 4
[* 2]
                                                                                                    INDEX NO. 157326/2023
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31                                                                        RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/15/2024

            became final and binding on DHS and BRC, and no further administrative action could prevent

            or ameliorate any purported injury caused by DHS's determination. See Walton, 8 N.Y.3d at 195.

            As such, Petitioner's deadline to challenge the sufficiency of the environmental review was four

            months thereafter, or May 31, 2022.

                   The petition however was not filed until July 21, 2023, more than thirteen months after

            the expiration of the statute of limitations on Petitioner's claims. Petitioner's claims are therefore

            time-barred.

                   Petitioner argues a work permit, issued by the Department of Buildings ("DOB") in May

            2023, constituted DHS' final action with respect to the challenged decision. However, DHS was

            already contractually bound to its decision to site the Shelter when the building permit issued,

            and no action taken by DOB would have prevented or ameliorated the alleged injury caused by

            the challenged decision.

                   Petitioner also argues, in the alternative, that there is ambiguity regarding when the

            underlying determination was finalized, and that precedent requires the ambiguity be construed

            against Respondent. The Court does not find any such ambiguity as on January 31, 2023, the

            contract was registered, the challenged determination became final and binding upon DHS, and

            DHS was bound to the terms of its contract as of said date.

                   Based on the forgoing the petition and order to show cause are denied and the cross-

            motion to dismiss is granted.

                   WHEREFORE it is hereby:

                   ADJUDGED that the petition for relief pursuant to Article 78 and Petitioner's order to

            show cause for a preliminary injunction are denied, the cross-motion is granted, and the

            proceeding is dismissed; and it is further

             157326/2023 MONTANO, RALDY vs. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF HOMELESS                    Page 3 of 4
             SERVICES
             Motion No. 001 002

                                                           3 of 4
[* 3]
                                                                                                      INDEX NO. 157326/2023
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31                                                                            RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/15/2024

                    ORDERED that, within 20 days from entry of this order, Respondent shall serve a copy of

            this order with notice of entry on the Clerk of the General Clerk's Office (60 Centre Street, Room

            119); and it is further

                    ORDERED that such service upon the Clerk shall be made in accordance with the

            procedures set forth in the Protocol on Courthouse and County Clerk Procedures for

           Electronically Filed Cases (accessible at the "E-Filing" page on the court's website at the address

            www.nycourts.gov/supctmanh);].

                    This constitutes the decision and order of the court.

                   2/15/2024
                      DATE                                                          SABRINA KRAUS, J.S.C.
             CHECK ONE:                  CASE DISPOSED                      NON-FINAL DISPOSITION

                                         GRANTED         □ DENIED           GRANTED IN PART          □ OTHER
             APPLICATION:                SETTLE ORDER                       SUBMIT ORDER

             CHECK IF APPROPRIATE:       INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN         FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT    □ REFERENCE

             157326/2023 MONTANO, RALDYvs. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF HOMELESS                       Page4 of 4
             SERVICES
             Motion No. 001 002

                                                           4 of 4
[* 4]