green
Positive treatment
3.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "see"
Sabino v. DiNapoli
Although the exhaustion requirement may be excused when, for example,' a party asserts a constitutional challenge to an agency’s action or “when resort to an administrative remedy would be futile” (Watergate II Apts. v Buffalo Sewer Auth., 46 NY2d at 57 ; see Matter of Connerton v Ryan, 86 AD3d 698, 699 [2011]), “the mere assertion that a constitutional right is involved will not excuse the failure to pursue established administrative procedures that can provide adequate relief” (Matter of Pfaff v Columbia-Greene Community Coll., 99 AD2d 887, 888 [1984]; see Matter of Schulz v State …
discussed
Cited "see"
Tasadfoy v. Town of Wappinger
Further, the mere assertion that a constitutional right is involved will not excuse the failure to pursue established administrative remedies that can provide the required relief’ (Matter of Dozier v New York City, 130 AD2d 128, 135 [1987]; see Matter of Schulz v State of New York, 86 NY2d 225, 232 [1995], cert denied 516 US 944 [1995]; Timber Ridge Homes at Brookhaven v State of New York, 223 AD2d 635, 636 [1996]; Matter of Levine v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 186 AD2d 743, 744 [1992]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Pocantico Home & Land Co. v. Union Free School District of Tarrytowns
In situations where the Legislature has made that choice, the Supreme Court’s power is limited to article 78 review, except where the applicability or constitutionality of the regulatory statute, or other like questions, are in issue” (Sohn v Calderon, 78 NY2d 755, 767 [1991]; see Matter of Schulz v State of New York, 86 NY2d 225, 231 [1995], cert denied 516 US 944 [1995]; Flacke v Onondaga Landfill Sys., 69 NY2d 355, 362-363 [1987]; Loretto v Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 58 NY2d 143, 152-153 [1983]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ambery v. Board of Trustees of New York City Fire Department
“It is well settled * * * that a petitioner may not raise new claims in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 that were not raised in the administrative hearing under review” (Matter of Collins v Amrhein, supra at 462-463; see Matter of Schulz v State of New York, 86 NY2d 225, 237 , cert denied 516 US 944 ).
discussed
Cited "see"
Arbor Hill Partners v. New York State Commissioner of Housing & Community Renewal
The limitations dispute notwithstanding, the failure to exhaust available State administrative remedies is a procedural bar to a regulatory taking action where “the claim hinges upon factual issues that are reviewable at the administrative level” (Timber Ridge Homes v State of New York, 223 AD2d 635, 636 , lv denied 88 NY2d 802 ; see, Matter of Schulz v State of New York, 86 NY2d 225, 232 , cert denied 516 US 944 ), and the mere assertion of a constitutional violation will not excuse a claimant from first pursuing administrative remedies that can provide the requested relief (see, Matter o…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sumner v. Hogan
However, “[c]ouching an adverse administrative decision in terms of a constitutional violation will not excuse a litigant from pursuing administrative remedies that can provide the requested substantive relief . . . where resolution of the constitutional claim . . . rests on factual issues that are reviewable administratively” (Siao-Pao v Travis, 23 AD3d 242 , 242- 243 [2005]; see also Matter of Schulz v State of New York, 86 NY2d 225, 232 [1995], cert denied 516 US 944 [1995]).
Garfield
v.
J. C. Nichols Real Estate
v.
J. C. Nichols Real Estate
No. 95-392.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 30, 1995.
Published
C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.