Opinion

Town Board of Huntington v. Plonski

  • 10 N.Y.2d 1035
Court
New York Court of Appeals
Filed
Jan 11, 1962
Status
Published
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 81.8%

The opinion

Order affirmed, without costs; no opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke and Foster. Judge Froessel dissents in the following memorandum: I dissent. Following the argument of the appeal in this court on November 16,1961 — at which time the 1960 amendment to the zoning ordinance was challenged *1038 for lack of proper notice and opportunity to be heard — there were submitted to us excerpts taken from the Town Board minutes of the November 28, 1961 hearing on the re-enactment of the 1960 amendment. Those excerpts show the following: “Resolution No. 30 — Re-enactment of Building Zone Ordinances. Kelly (a member of the Town Board) stated that he voted yes for this proposal on the strength of the statement made by the Town Attorney and the Supervisor that this would not retroactively affect existing parking lots and would only apply to new applications.” In view of the foregoing, I am of the opinion that there should be a reargument here.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.