Case law

Reed v. Board of Standards & Appeals

230 A.D. 21 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 13, 1930

Having the power to make its decision the discretion of the board in the absence of bad faith may not be reviewed. (Matter of Boyd v. Walsh, 217 App. Div. 461 .)” The case of Matter of Vesell v. Walsh ( 225 App. … Smith v.

Dearborn Associates v. Environmental Control Board

144 A.D.2d 556 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 21, 1988

(see, Matter of Fanelli v New York City Conciliation & Appeals Bd., 90 AD2d 756 , affd 58 NY2d 952 ). … J., Brown, Kunzeman, Weinstein and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Brown v. Neighborhood Assn. for Inter-Cultural Affairs, Inc.

2023 NY Slip Op 01836 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 6, 2023

Brown v Neighborhood Assn. for Inter-Cultural Affairs, Inc. ( 2023 NY Slip Op 01836 ) Brown v Neighborhood Assn. for Inter-Cultural Affairs, Inc. 2023 NY Slip Op 01836 Decided on April 06, 2023 Appellate Division, First Department … Index No. 23079/19E Appeal No. 17651-17652 Case No. 2022-01898 , 2022-03201 [*1]Takisha Brown etc., Appellant, v Neighborhood Association for Inter-Cultural Affairs, Inc., et al., Defendants-Appellants, NAICA Housing Development

Board of Fire Commissioners of Tappan Fire District v. Planning Board of Orangetown

253 A.D.2d 875 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 28, 1998

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Planning Board of the Town of Orangetown, dated June 12, 1996, which denied the petitioner’s application for preliminary site-plan approval

Hotaling v. Zoning Board of Appeals

6 A.D.3d 1227 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 30, 2004

The zoning regulation applicable herein prohibits “adult uses” within 1,000 *1228 feet of property used for residential purposes, and thus a use variance is required (see Matter of Doran v Lewis, 309 AD2d 1183, 1184 [2003 … of Monroe, 50 NY2d 695, 702 [1980]; see also DiMiero v Livingston-Steuben-Wyoming County Bd. of Coop.

Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Brown

2020 NY Slip Op 04824 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 2, 2020

Trust Co. v Brown ( 2020 NY Slip Op 04824 ) Deutsche Bank Natl. … Trust Co. v Brown 2020 NY Slip Op 04824 Decided on September 2, 2020 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

Westervelt v. Zoning Board of Appeals

7 A.D.3d 632 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 10, 2004

Accurso v. Board of Administration

18 A.D.3d 653 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 16, 2005

I membership in the New York City Employees Retirement System, by not affording them service credit for prior employment with a different public employer, was not arbitrary or capricious (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ … No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222 [1974]; Matter of Colton v Berman, 21 NY2d 322 [1967]; Matter of Valle v Buscemi, 233 AD2d 334 [1996]).

Levy v. Board of Zoning & Appeals

160 A.D.2d 941 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 23, 1990

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Zoning and Appeals of the Village of Kings Point, dated June 22, 1988, which denied the petitioners’ application for an area variance, … the Board of Zoning and Appeals of the Village of Kings Point appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Shaughnessy, J.), entered November 14,1988, which granted the *942 petition, annulled the determination

Brown v. Supreme Court

29 A.D.2d 347 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 12, 1968

And as the statute does not distinguish between trial and post-conviction proceedings, it does not offend against the principle of Long v. District Ct. of Iowa ( 385 U. S. 192 ). … According to all the authorities the State in which the proceeding is pending is the party obligated to supply minutes (Smith v. Bennett, 365 U. S. 708 ; Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U. S. 12 ).

Oshry v. Zoning Board of Appeals

276 A.D.2d 491 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 2, 2000

applications for variances (see, Matter of Cipriano v Board of Zoning Appeals, 203 AD2d 362 ). … While a violation of the Open Meetings Law alone may not be sufficient to invalidate the determination of the ZBA (see, Matter of Cipriano v Board of Zoning Appeals, supra), where, as here, there are other concerns regarding

Dubbs v. Board of Assessment Review

46 A.D.2d 651 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 7, 1974

Such a proceeding would be improper (Van Deventer v. Long Is. City, 139 N. V. 133). … Accordingly, the petition should not have been dismissed (Matter of Winter v. Board, of Assessors of County of Nassau, 63 Mise 2d 451; 24 Carmody Wait 2d, N. V. Practice, § 145:255).

Danyla v. Town Board of Florida

259 A.D.2d 850 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 11, 1999

After the public hearing and comment period required by SEQRA, the final version of the CP/GEIS was approved by the Town Board in January 1996. … of Horn v International Bus.

Brown Transport Corp. v. United Merchants & Manufacturers, Inc.

21 A.D.2d 303 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 11, 1964

Express Co. v. Mohawk Dairy Co., 250 Mass. 1, 9 [1924]; Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. R. Co. v. Evans, etc., 221 Mo. App. 757, 762 [1926]; Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. Lovell, 111 Misc. 735 , 737 [Mun.

Glass v. Zoning Board of Appeals

5 A.D.2d 991 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 7, 1958

Brown v. Neighborhood Assn. for Inter-Cultural Affairs, Inc.

2023 NY Slip Op 01836 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 6, 2023

Brown v Neighborhood Assn. for Inter-Cultural Affairs, Inc. ( 2023 NY Slip Op 01836 ) Brown v Neighborhood Assn. for Inter-Cultural Affairs, Inc. 2023 NY Slip Op 01836 Decided on April 06, 2023 Appellate Division, First Department … Index No. 23079/19E Appeal No. 17651-17652 Case No. 2022-01898 , 2022-03201 [*1]Takisha Brown etc., Appellant, v Neighborhood Association for Inter-Cultural Affairs, Inc., et al., Defendants-Appellants, NAICA Housing Development

Brown ex rel. Stevens v. State

144 A.D.3d 88 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 7, 2016

The Education Article does not protect schools; it protects the “students . . . constitutional right to a ‘sound basic education’ ” (Paynter v State of New York, 100 NY2d 434, 439 [2003], quoting Board of Educ., Levittown … V.

Farkas v. Public Employment Relations Board

97 A.D.2d 569 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 6, 1983

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Public Employment Relations Board which found that … In order to establish a breach of the duty of fair representation, petitioner must demonstrate bad faith, arbitrariness or discrimination on the part of the union (Stempien v Civil Serv. Employees Assn., 91 AD2d 864 ).

Lombardi v. State Board of Elections

54 A.D.2d 532 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 31, 1976

On this record, we find no merit in appellant’s contention that the respondent’s petition, as supplemented, is legally insufficient (see Matter of Reich v Power, 30 AD2d 925 ). … who acted as a commissioner of deeds on these sheets admittedly did not swear any of the persons whose signatures appear thereon, these signatures were properly invalidated (Election Law, § 135, subd 2; Matter of Donnelly v

Capital Newspapers Group of Hearst Corp. v. Brown

75 A.D.2d 218 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 26, 1980

Leggett, 48 NY2d 430 ), and seek relief in the nature of an order (a) declaring that the closure by respondent Brown was illegal, (b) enjoining respondent Brown from excluding the press in future criminal actions unless specific … Accordingly, we conclude that respondent Brown erred in ordering closure.