You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Rochester Community Savings Bank v. Board of Assessors

Citations: 248 A.D.2d 949; 669 N.Y.S.2d 1008; 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2976

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; March 12, 1998; New York; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this appellate case, six petitioners sought to challenge the dismissal of their RPTL article 7 proceedings, which they initiated on the last permissible day but failed to follow with timely affidavits of service as required by CPLR former 306-b (a). Upon recommencing actions beyond the prescribed 15-day period following dismissal, the respondents moved to dismiss these renewed proceedings, contending that CPLR 205 (a) could not rescue the untimeliness due to the specific controls of CPLR former 306-b (b). The Supreme Court initially felt constrained by precedent in Matter of Winston, which favored CPLR 205 (a), but the appellate court diverged from this view. It ruled that the unequivocal language of CPLR former 306-b (b) necessitates commencement of new proceedings within 15 days post-dismissal, thereby invalidating the applicability of CPLR 205 (a) in this context. Consequently, the appellate court reversed the lower court's order, dismissing the recommenced actions, and underscored that the failure to file affidavits of service does not constitute a jurisdictional defect, though it deemed it unnecessary to further address this aspect.

Legal Issues Addressed

Applicability of CPLR 205 (a)

Application: The court found that CPLR 205 (a) does not apply when CPLR former 306-b (b) requires specific timelines for recommencement after dismissal for lack of service proof.

Reasoning: The court's interpretation is that a new special proceeding must be initiated within the specified time after dismissal, thereby dismissing the recommenced proceedings.

Non-Jurisdictional Nature of Affidavit of Service Filing

Application: The court noted that failing to file affidavits of service is not a jurisdictional defect, although it was not necessary to further address this issue.

Reasoning: The court also noted that the failure to file affidavits of service is not a jurisdictional defect, but they did not need to address this point further.

Recommencement of Proceedings under CPLR former 306-b (b)

Application: The court determined that proceedings dismissed for lack of service proof must be recommenced within 15 days of dismissal as mandated by CPLR former 306-b (b).

Reasoning: CPLR former 306-b (b) clearly mandates recommencement within 15 days after a dismissal for failure to file proof of service.