DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
A municipality may demolish a building without providing notice and an opportunity to be heard if there are exigent circumstances which require immediate demolition of the building to protect the public from imminent danger (see, Starik v. City of New York, 68 A.D.2d 936; Merino v. City of Middletown, ___ A.D.2d ___ [decided herewith]; Rampart Tennis Corp. v. City of New York, 212 A.D.2d 481; Matter of City of New York v. Unsafe Bldg. and Structure Located at 344 East 110th St., 77 Misc.2d 562; Moses v. City Council of Long Beach, 71 Misc.2d 925; see also, Brookhaven Town Code § 73-15). In this case, immediate action was not required and there was time to provide notice and an opportunity to be heard. Therefore, the failure to provide the same is a violation of due process rights for which liability will attach (see, Town Law § 130 Town[16][b]; Scott v. Town of Duanesburg, 176 A.D.2d 989; Colonial Country Club, v. Village of Ellenville, 126 Misc.2d 814; Matter of Janks v. City of Syracuse, 47 Misc.2d 718; see also, 7A McQuillan, Municipal Corporations, § 24.561 [3d Ed]). The Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment on the issue of liability to the plaintiffs, because the appellant knew of the plaintiffs' mortgage on the property and there was sufficient time for the appellant to give the plaintiffs notice and an opportunity to be heard.
THOMPSON, J.P., LUCIANO, FEUERSTEIN and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.