IN THE MATTER OF MARGARET WOOSTER, CLAYTON S. "JAY" BURNEY, JR., LYNDA K. STEPHENS AND JAMES E. CARR, V QUEEN CITY
Motion No: CA 16-02043
Slip Opinion No: 2017 NY Slip Op 69825(U)
Decided on April 4, 2017
Appellate Division, Fourth Department, Motion Decision
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This motion is uncorrected and is not subject to publication in the Official Reports.


April 4, 2017

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, PERADOTTO, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

DOCKET NO. CA 16-02043
DOCKET NO. CA 16-02077

IN THE MATTER OF MARGARET WOOSTER, CLAYTON S. "JAY" BURNEY,

JR., LYNDA K. STEPHENS AND JAMES E. CARR,

PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS-RESPONDENTS,

V

QUEEN CITY LANDING, LLC, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT,

CITY OF BUFFALO PLANNING BOARD AND CITY OF BUFFALO COMMON

COUNCIL, RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.

(PROCEEDING NO.1.)



IN THE MATTER OF BUFFALO NIAGARA RIVERKEEPERS, INC.,

PETITIONER-APPELLANT-RESPONDENT,

V

CITY OF BUFFALO, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT,

AND QUEEN CITY LANDING, LLC,

RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

(PROCEEDING NO. 2.)

(APPEAL NO. 1.)

IN THE MATTER OF MARGARET WOOSTER, CLAYTON S. "JAY" BURNEY, JR.,

LYNDA K. STEPHENS AND JAMES E. CARR, PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS,

V

QUEEN CITY LANDING, LLC, CITY OF BUFFALO PLANNING BOARD AND

CITY OF BUFFALO COMMON COUNCIL, RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.

(APPEAL NO. 2.)


Respondent Queen City Landing, LLC having moved to strike point I and Appendix A in the reply brief filed by petitioners on the appeal taken herein from orders and judgments of the Supreme Court entered in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Erie on October 11, 2016, and November 9, 2016,

Now, upon reading and filing the affirmation of Elizabeth A. Kraegel, Esq., dated March 1, 2017, the notice of motion with proof of service thereof, the affirmation of Arthur J. Giacalone, Esq., dated March 15, 2017, and the affidavit of Jessica M. Lazarin, Esq., sworn to March 15, 2017, and due deliberation having been had thereon,

It is hereby ORDERED that the motion is denied without prejudice and leave to renew the arguments in support of and in opposition to the motion at oral argument.

Entered: April 4, 2017

Frances E. Cafarell, Clerk