Branic International Realty Corp. v. Pitt

Branic International Realty Corp. v. Phillip Pitt

24 N.Y.3d 1005, 21 N.E.3d 563 • 2014-11-18

Citation24 N.Y.3d 1005, 21 N.E.3d 563

Date Filed2014-11-18

JudgeAbdus, Graffeo, Lippman, Pigott, Read, Rivera, Salaam, Smith

Cited23 times

StatusPublished

Attorneys

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Rosenberg Calica & Birney LLP, Garden City (Ronald J. Rosenberg and Lesley A. Reardon of counsel), for appellant., Goddaard Riverside SRO Law Project, New York City (Martha A. Weithman of counsel), and Manhattan Legal Services, New York City {Jim Provost of counsel), for respondent., MFY Legal Services, Inc., New York City {Tanya Kessler, Brian Sullivan, Kevin Cremin and Jeanette Zelhof of counsel), and Covington & Burling LLP, New York City (C. William Phillips and Evie Spanos of counsel), for The Bronx Defenders and others, amici curiae.

Full Opinion (html_with_citations)

*1007OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, without costs, the matter remitted to the Appellate Division with directions to dismiss the proceeding solely on the ground of mootness, and the certified question not answered as unnecessary.

The issues presented in this case are moot because respondent voluntarily vacated the premises. The mootness exception is not applicable under the facts of this case (see e.g. Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715 [1980]) and therefore the proceeding should be dismissed (see Matter of Park E. Corp. v Whalen, 43 NY2d 735, 736 [1977]).

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Rivera concur; Judge Abdus-Salaam taking no part.

Order reversed, without costs, matter remitted to the Appellate Division, First Department, with directions to dismiss the petition solely on the ground of mootness and certified question not answered as unnecessary, in a memorandum.