N.Y. Laws » CHAPTER Town / ARTICLE District and Special Improvements
New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Town Law § 195 (2026)

Recording of determination; review by certiorari

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
§ 195. Recording of determination; review by certiorari. 1. The town
clerk shall cause a certified copy of the determination or order of the
town board adopted pursuant to the provisions of this article, or
adopted pursuant to the provisions of article seventeen-A of the general
municipal law, establishing, extending, dissolving or diminishing any
district, consolidating districts or increasing the maximum amount
proposed to be expended for the improvement in any district or extension
thereof, or determining to construct any improvement authorized by this
article, to be duly recorded in the office of the clerk of the county in
which the town is located, within ten days after the adoption of such
order or determination by the town board, and when so recorded such
determination or order shall be presumptive evidence of the regularity
of the proceedings for the establishment, extension, dissolution or
diminution of such district, of the proceedings instituted for the
construction of such improvement and of all other action taken by said
town board in relation thereto.
  Within ten days after the adoption of a determination or order by the
town board establishing, extending, dissolving or diminishing a
district, or consolidating districts, the town clerk shall cause a
certified copy thereof to be filed in the office of the state department
of audit and control at Albany, New York.
  2. Any interested person aggrieved by any final determination or order
made pursuant to the provisions of this article may review the same by
certiorari provided that the application for such order of certiorari is
made within thirty days from the date of the recording of the certified
copy of the order or determination in the office of the clerk of the
county. The said determination or order shall be final and conclusive
unless application has been made for review by certiorari within thirty
days from the time of recording thereof. No review shall be had unless
at the time of the application for a certiorari order the interested
person seeking the review shall give an undertaking approved by the
supreme court, or a justice thereof, as to form, amount and sufficiency
sureties, that, in the event of failure to modify said final
determination or order he or they will pay to the town board, all such
costs and expenses as are incurred by it on account of the said
certiorari proceedings, as shall be determined by the court. In the
event that upon such review there shall be any modification by the court
of said final determination or order the court shall direct the
modification thereof by order which shall be final and conclusive and
such town board shall cause such order to be recorded and filed in the
same places and manner as was the determination or order appealed from.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1994–2020 · leading case: Herzog v. Town of Thompson, 251 A.D.2d 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Herzog v. Town of Thompson, 251 A.D.2d 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 1998). · cites it 5× “In any event, Town Law § 195 provides that any party aggrieved by a determination of a town board establishing or extending any improvement district must challenge that determination within 30 days by means of a CPLR article 78 proceeding in the nature of certiorari (see, Town…”
Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Town of Watertown, 843 N.E.2d 1138 (N.Y. 2005). · cites it 2× “In both Bethlehem and Watertown, the trial courts and the Appellate Division concluded that Niagara Mohawk’s challenges were time-barred by Town Law § 195 (2), and so never reached the merits.”
Red Hook/Gowanus Chamber of Com. v. New York City Bd. of Standards, 839 N.E.2d 878 (N.Y. 2005). “General City Law § 38; Town Law § 195). The City’s legislative determination to impose a 30-day period by which to file a challenge to a zoning decision balances powerful competing interests—allowing for citizen challenges on the one hand, while recognizing the urgency of…”
New York Tel. Co. v. Supervisor of Town of Oyster Bay, 828 N.E.2d 964 (N.Y. 2005). “We note that NYTC’s challenge here constitutes a plenary action attacking the Town’s authority to impose special ad valorem levies for garbage and refuse collection on the subject mass properties, and it is therefore not time-barred under Town Law § 195 (2) (see Niagara Mohawk…”
Dandomar Co. v. Town of Pleasant Valley Town Bd., 86 A.D.3d 83 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2011). “of City of Albany, 83 AD2d 741, 742 [1981] [the 30-day limitations period of General City Law § 38 applies only to planning board determinations]; Matter of Niegocki v Town of Brookhaven, 5 AD2d 999 [1958] [pursuant to Town Law § 195 (2), a proceeding to review a town board…”
Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Town of Bethlehem, 16 A.D.3d 888 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2005). · cites it 6× “*889 Town Law § 195 (2) expressly provides that a town’s final determination establishing or extending a water district must be challenged within 30 days of its filing and must be accompanied by an undertaking sufficient to cover the town’s expenses should the challenge prove…”
Angelis v. Town of New Baltimore, 30 A.D.3d 940 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2006). · cites it 2× “Supreme Court properly dismissed those causes of action seeking declaratory judgments inasmuch as an article 78 proceeding is the exclusive means by which to review this action, undertaken pursuant to Town Law article 12, challenging the process by which the Town created the…”
Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Town of Watertown, 12 A.D.3d 1188 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2004). “Supreme Court properly concluded that any such challenge was required to be made within 30 days of the creation of those districts, as provided by Town Law § 195 (2). The newest of the sewer districts at issue was created in October 1997 and has included petitioner’s properties…”
Matter of Beer v. Vill. of New Paltz, 2018 NY Slip Op 5245 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2018). · cites it 2× “" To that end, a proceeding challenging a determination or order of a town board establishing a water district must be commenced within 30 days after such determination or order is recorded in the county clerk's office ( see Town Law § 195 [2]).”
Matter of Ball v. Town of Ballston, 182 A.D.3d 818 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2020). · cites it 2× “1, finding, in part, that Katz waived its statute of limitations defense pursuant to Town Law § 195. On the merits, the court dismissed proceeding No.”
Deep v. Karin, 206 A.D.2d 829 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 1994). “Further, as Supreme Court found, petitioner failed to give an undertaking at the time he applied for review of respondents’ determination (see, Town Law § 195 [2]). The petition, therefore, was properly dismissed.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.