Case law

Jamison v. Board of Education

279 A.D.2d 289 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 9, 2001

for, inter alia, various discovery directives, including the production of witnesses for deposition, document production, and an extension of time to file their note of issue, and granted the cross motion of defendants Board … Our review of the record indicates that the primary issue is *290 whether the Board failed to provide appropriate security for plaintiff infant which might have prevented the underlying assault.

O'Connor v. State Board of Parole

270 A.D. 93 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 14, 1945

Petitioner appeared before the Parole Board on September 16, 1941, and' was denied parole. … We forbear from discussing the merits of petitioner’s fitness for parole because no judicial review of such a matter on the merits may be had (Matter of Hines v. State Board of Parole, 293 N. Y. 254 ).

Kiehm v. Board of Education

203 A.D. 245 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 15, 1922

Kiehm v. Board of Education, 198 App. Div. 476 .) Thereafter various hearings were had and the petitioners furnished evidence to the effect that their claim was just and legal for the sum of $29,904.15. … McMillen v. Vanderpoel ( 35 App. Div. 73 ), that the board had other information upon which it based its audit.

Luburic v. Zoning Board of Appeals

106 A.D.3d 824 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 8, 2013

Generally, local zoning boards have broad discretion in deciding applications (see Matter of Pecoraro v Board of Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 2 NY3d 608, 613 [2004]; Matter of Goldberg v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of City of … of Pecoraro v Board of Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 2 NY3d at 613 ).

Lubin v. Board of Education

95 A.D.2d 778 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 6, 1983

anew the time within which review could be sought (see Matter ofDe Milio v Borghard, 55 NY2d 216, 221-222; Matter of Trivedi v State Bd. of Law Examiners, 86 AD2d 719 ; cf. … Matter of Camperlengo v State Liq. Auth., 16 AD2d 342 ). On this analysis, we need pass upon no further issue. Gulotta, J. P., O’Connor, Bracken and Brown, JJ., concur.

Ralph v. Board of Estimate

278 A.D. 793 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 30, 1951

(Ziadi v. Interurban St. By. Go., 97 App. Div. 137 .) Even if it had jurisdiction to determine the question, People ex rel. Manhattan Stor. é Warehouse Go. v. Lilly ( 299 N. Y. 281 ) would require denial of the motion.

Brown v. Brink Elevator Corp.

125 A.D.3d 421 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 3, 2015

concerning continuing disabilities in her cervical spine, defendant was “entitled to newly exercise any and all rights of discovery” with respect to such newly alleged continuing disabilities (CPLR 3043 [b]; see DeLuca v … otherwise cause prejudice to plaintiff, the court improvidently exercised its discretion in requiring the further physical examination to be conducted by the same physician that conducted the initial examination (Lewis v

Braunstein v. Board of Zoning Appeals

100 A.D.3d 1091 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 1, 2012

Board of Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 2 NY3d 608, 612-613 [2004]; Matter of Mary T. … of Pecoraro v Board of Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 2 NY3d at 613 ).

Jonathan A. v. Board of Education

8 A.D.3d 80 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 10, 2004

Corp., 96 NY2d 222, 233 [2001], quoting D'Amico v Christie, 71 NY2d 76, 88 [1987]; see also Purdy v Public Adm’r, 72 NY2d 1, 8 [1988]; People v Sturm, Ruger & Co., 309 AD2d 91, 95 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 514 [2003]). … Gonzalez v 98 Mag Leasing Corp., 95 NY2d 124 [2000]; M.D. v Pasadena Realty Co., 300 AD2d 235 [2002]). Concur— Sullivan, J.P., Lerner, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

Doggett v. Board of Education

120 A.D. 885 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 15, 1907

Spaulding v. American Wood Board Co.

58 A.D. 314 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1901

(Sprague v. Bartholdi Hotel Co., 68 Hun, 555 .)

Glicksman v. Board of Education/Central School Board of Comsewogue Union Free School District

278 A.D.2d 364 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 18, 2000

Certain exceptions to this general rule evolved where the case was still pending, ei *366 ther in the trial court or on appeal (see, Matter of Barnes [Council 82, AFSCME], supra; Bray v Gluck, 235 AD2d 72 ; Foley v Roche, … supra; see also, Deeves v Fabric Fire Hose Co., 19 AD2d 735 , affd 14 NY2d 633 ).

Pagliaroli v. Zoning Board of Appeals

66 A.D.2d 997 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 15, 1978

(Matter of Bianca v Frank, supra, p 173.) … (Matter of Bianca v Frank, supra, p 173.)

Martirano v. Zoning Board of Appeals

87 A.D.2d 820 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 5, 1982

Vil. of Hempstead, 45 NY2d 105, 108 ), a self-created difficulty is a factor which may be considered by a zoning board (Matter of National Merrit v Weist, 41 NY2d 438 ). … Accordingly, we hold that the zoning board’s determination denying the variance was supported by substantial evidence (see Matter of Fuhstv Foley, 45 NY2d 441 , supra; Matter ofEichenbaum v Arred, 72 AD2d 563 ).

Varley v. Zoning Board of Appeals

131 A.D.2d 905 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 4, 1987

The test for unnecessary hardship is articulated in the often-quoted case Matter of Otto v Steinhilber ( 282 NY 71, 76 ) as follows: "Before the Board may exercise its discretion and grant a variance upon the ground of unnecessary … v Board of Appeals, 100 AD2d 590 ).

Eagle Insurance v. Brown

205 A.D.2d 774 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 27, 1994

Co. v Dumawal, 200 AD2d 353 ; Matter of Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v Annunziato, 187 AD2d 429 ; Matter of Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v Alberto, 186 AD2d 658 ).

Harden v. Board of Elections

153 A.D.2d 540 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 24, 1989

Eistein v. Board of Trustees

184 A.D.2d 1079 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 5, 1992

Contrary to plaintiffs contention, the record demonstrates that plaintiff did not have a complete subdivision application before the planning board under the zoning ordinance prior to its amendment. … Koch, 72 NY2d 121, 131 ; Rodgers v Village of Tarrytown, 302 NY 115, 121 ; Pyne v Knaisch, 159 AD2d 999 ; Kravetz v Plenge, 84 AD2d 422 ; see also, Goodrich v Town of Southampton, 39 NY2d 1008 ).

Cole, Schotz, Meisel, Forman & Leonard, P.A. v. Brown

109 A.D.3d 764 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 26, 2013

Friedman, J.), entered July 19, 2012, which granted the motion of individual defendants Chris Brown, Julio Marquez and Javier Saade to dismiss the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs. … Accordingly, the fraud claim against the individual defendants is duplicative of the breach of contract claim asserted against the corporation (see Fairway Prime Estate Mgt., LLC v First Am. Intl.

Cattaraugus County Bank v. Brown

122 A.D.3d 1313 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 14, 2014

Plaintiff met its initial burden by submitting the promissory note, the unconditional guarantee of defendant Green Gable Village, Limited, and evidence of defendant Corey W Brown’s default on the note (see Counsel Fin. … Servs., LLC v David McQuade Leibowitz, P.C., 67 AD3d 1483, 1484 [2009]; LaMar v Vasile [appeal No. 4], 49 AD3d 1218, 1219 [2008]), and defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact.