# Paden v. Planning Board of Mamakating

> Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · March 9, 2000 · 270 A.D.2d 626

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6047000

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Matter of Margaret Paden v. Planning Board of the Town of Mamakating
- **Court:** Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- **Decided:** March 9, 2000
- **Citations:** 270 A.D.2d 626; 704 N.Y.S.2d 523; 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2619
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Carpinello
- **Judges:** Carpinello
- **Cited by:** 9 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6047000

## Opinion text

—Carpinello, J.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Kane, J.), entered February 16, 1999 in Sullivan County, which dismissed petitioners’ application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a site plan approval by respondent Planning Board of the Town of Mamakating.
Petitioners challenge a determination of respondent Planning Board of the Town of Mamakating granting respondent J.M.L. Quarries, Inc. site plan approval to construct an asphalt concrete batch plant on a four-acre portion of its 465-acre quarry site in the Town of Mamakating, Sullivan County. In their brief, petitioners acknowledge that construction of the plant has been completed, a fact confirmed at oral argument. As a consequence, this appeal has been rendered moot in view of petitioners’ failure to seek injunctive relief protecting their interests during the pendency of this appeal (see, e.g., Matter of Many v Village of Sharon Springs Bd. of Trustees, 234 AD2d 643, 644 , lv denied 89 NY2d 811 ; Matter of Save the Pine Bush v City Engr. of City of Albany, 220 AD2d 871, 872 , lv denied 87 NY2d 807 ; Matter of Serafín v Wallace, 117 AD2d 926, 927 ; Matter of Friends of Pine Bush v Planning Bd., 86 AD2d 246, 247-248 , affd 59 NY2d 849 ). There being no basis for applying any of the exceptions to the mootness doctrine, the appeal should be dismissed (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 713-714 ; cf., Matter of Save the Pine Bush v City of Albany, 141 AD2d 949, 951 , lv denied 73 NY2d 701 ). Even if we were to address the merits, none of the arguments advanced by petitioners warrants annulment of the Planning Board’s determination.
*627 Cardona, P. J., Peters, Graffeo and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6047000. Public record. Not legal advice.