Case law

Village of Canajoharie v. Planning Board

63 A.D.3d 1498 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 25, 2009

of Bridon Realty Co. v Town Bd. of Town of Clarkstown, 250 AD2d 677, 677-678 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 813 [1998]; Matter of Valhalla Union Free School Dist. v Board of Legislators of County of Westchester, 183 AD2d 771, … Because Canajoharie is located approximately 20 miles from the project, it most certainly is not presumptively aggrieved by it (see Matter of Sun-Brite Car Wash v Board of Zoning & Appeals of Town of N.

Wood v. Board of Education

267 A.D. 959 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 3, 1944

Civil Practice Act, determination of respondent dismissing petitioner from his position as a teacher of swimming reversed on the law, with fifty dollars costs and disbursements to petitioner, and the matter remitted to the Board … (Matter of Elite Dairy Products v. Ten Eyck, 271 N. Y. 488 ; N. Y. Water Service Corp. v. Water P. é C. Comm., 283 N. Y. 23 ; Matter of Guernsey Breeders Co-Op. V. Noyes, 284 N. Y. 197 ; Matter of Collins V.

Carman v. Board of Elections

96 A.D.2d 1014 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 25, 1983

Hinton v. Board of Elections

93 A.D.2d 897 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 28, 1983

Bigelow v. Board of Trustees

98 A.D.2d 933 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 29, 1983

Dowling, 90 AD2d 849 , app dsmd 58 NY2d 1113 , quoting Matter of Simpson v Wolansky, 38 NY2d 391, 396 ; see, also, Matter ofSpetalieri v Quick, 96 AD2d 611, 612 ). … Our discussion in Matter of Kleinsmith v Connelie (id.) about why remittal was unnecessary and why Matter of Simpson v Wolansky ( 38 NY2d 391 , supra:) and Matter of Thompson v Lent ( 53 AD2d 721 ) were not controlling is

Disanza v. Town Board of Cortlandt

90 A.D.3d 659 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 6, 2011

Here, the Supreme Court properly determined that the petitioner failed to sustain his burden of proving that the Town Board of the Town of Cortlandt did not act in good faith (see Matter of Hritz-Seifts v Town of Poughkeepsie … , 22 AD3d at 493 ; Matter of Rose v City of Newburgh, 239 AD2d at 588 ; see also Matter of Linney v City of Plattsburgh, 49 AD3d 1020, 1021-1022 [2008]). *660 Moreover, the petitioner’s contention that the Town Board of the

Baldino v. Board of Elections

89 A.D.2d 952 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 1, 1982

Chase v. Board of Education

88 A.D.2d 535 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 13, 1982

Chirgwin v. Board of Education

84 A.D.2d 736 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 24, 1981

Davis v. Board of Education

83 A.D.2d 991 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 18, 1981

Augustin v. Board of Elections

83 A.D.2d 890 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 27, 1981

Levine v. Board of Education

81 A.D.2d 907 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 26, 1981

O'Flaherty v. Board of Education

81 A.D.2d 669 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 27, 1981

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Education of the City of New York, dated February 9, 1979 and made after a hearing, which found petitioner guilty of certain charges … In light of all the circumstances, we cannot say that the punishment of dismissal was so disproportionate to the offenses committed as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d

Siwula v. Allegany County Board

73 A.D.2d 789 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 7, 1979

Harff v. Board of Education

70 A.D.2d 937 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 18, 1979

record reveals there is substantial evidence to support the charges of incompetence, and the penalty of dismissal is not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see Matter of Pell v … Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222 ).

Sheikowitz v. Board of Regents

57 A.D.2d 1031 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 26, 1977

Proceeding initiated in this court pursuant to subdivision 4 of section 6510 of the Education Law to review a determination of the Board of Regents suspending the petitioner’s license to practice as a pharmacist for a period

James v. Board of Education

57 A.D.2d 540 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 29, 1977

Kuntz v. Board of Assessment

211 A.D.2d 841 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 5, 1995

Insofar as petitioner seeks to appeal from the denial of his motion to reargue, the order is not appealable (see, e.g., Burton *842 v Coonrod, 170 AD2d 882, 883 ).

Siesto v. Board of Commissioners

54 A.D.2d 580 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 27, 1976

The board’s determination finding petitioner guilty of the charges herein is supported by substantial, evidence. … We do not find that the fine and demotion imposed require judicial correction (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222 ). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Damiani, Shapiro and Titone, JJ., concur.

Benjamin v. Board of Assessors

51 A.D.2d 1015 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 15, 1976