Case law

Ortiz v. Board of Regents

13 A.D.3d 965 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 23, 2004

Prior thereto, he took and passed step I of the three-step licensing exam issued by the National Board of Medical Examiners (hereinafter NBME). … Unemployment Compensation Commn. of Alaska v Aragon, 329 US 143, 155 [1946]).

Brown v. New York City Department of Correction

288 A.D.2d 162 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 29, 2001

This report, which was noted in the correction officer’s log book, gave the Hearing Officer a sufficient basis for finding that the refusals to testify were genuine (see, Matter of Luna v Coughlin, 210 AD2d 757 ). … forms from these two purported witnesses, as required by respondent’s Directive 6500, was harmless error where the record confirms their refusal to testify and petitioner was not otherwise prejudiced (see, Matter of Shannon v

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]).

Jones v. Zoning Board of Appeals

61 A.D.3d 1299 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 30, 2009

He thereafter applied to respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Oneonta for a use variance. … Following a hearing, the Board granted the use variance, prompting this proceeding by petitioners seeking its annulment.

Rayle v. Town of Cato Board

295 A.D.2d 978 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 14, 2002

, 246 AD2d 217, 221 ; see Matter of Boyles v Town Bd. of Town of Bethlehem, 278 AD2d 688, 690 ; see also Pyne v Knaisch, 159 AD2d 999, 1000 ). … Respondent was initially presented with a handwritten letter requesting a PDD and referred the matter to the Town Planning Board (Planning Board).

Jaroff v. Board of Assessment Review

89 A.D.2d 617 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 26, 1982

the tax assessor lacked jurisdiction over the subject property, the sole remedy of a taxpayer is a proceeding to review an assessment of real property in accordance with article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law (Somarelli v … Co. v Board of Assessors of County of Nassau, 69 AD2d 828 , affd 49 NY2d 866 ).

Schlichting v. Town Board of Bedford

175 A.D.2d 805 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 5, 1991

Town’s argument that Religious Corporations Law §7 gives a religious corporation the authorization to use its lands for cemetery purposes without compliance with other statutory restrictions is without merit (see, Moritz v … Both resolutions and local laws are legislative acts (see, Matter of Reese v Lombard, 47 AD2d 327, 330 ).

Brown v. Retsof Mining Co.

100 N.Y.S. 1108 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 15, 1906

No opinion, Judgment unanimously affirmed, and ordei granting extra allowance reversed for want el power in the court at Trial Term to grant the same, without costs to either party, on the authority of Brown v.

Grassel v. Public Employment Relations Board

301 A.D.2d 522 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 13, 2003

Relations Bd., 48 NY2d 398, 404-405 ; Ponticello v County of Suffolk, 225 AD2d 751, 752 ). … , State of New York and the UFT (Matter of Incorporated Vil. of Lynbrook v New York State Pub.

Wahl v. Zoning Board of Appeals

115 A.D.2d 956 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 20, 1985

Memorandum: Special Term’s judgment annulling the Zoning Board’s determination denying petitioner’s application for a special exception permit and directing the Board to issue the permit should be affirmed (see, Green v Lo … As such, it is tantamount to a legislative finding that the use is in harmony with the general zoning plan and will not adversely affect the neighborhood (Matter of North Shore Steak House v Board of Appeals, 30 NY2d 238,

D.E.P. Resources, Inc. v. Planning Board

131 A.D.2d 757 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 22, 1987

This requirement may not be circumvented, even though one board member was absent and one abstained (see, Matter of Town of Smithtown v Howell, supra, at 377). … J., Thompson, Brown and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Van Dolsen v. Board of Education

29 A.D. 501 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 1, 1898

officers and approved by such board, and an appropriation shall have been made by the board of education therefor. … (Walton v. The Mayor, 26 App. Div. 76 .) The judgment was right and is affirmed with costs. Van Brunt, P. J., Patterson, O’Brien and McLaughlin, JJ., concurred. Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Chase Manhattan Bank v. Brown & East Ridge Partners

243 A.D.2d 81 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 29, 1998

The order and judgment was affirmed on appeal on December 30, 1996 (Brown & E. Ridge Partners v Fay’s Inc., 234 AD2d 1021 ). … The court declined to apply the general rule that a receiver is entitled to unpaid rents accruing prior to his or her appointment (Board of Natl. Missions of Presbyt. Church v Borough Asphalt Co., supra, at 262).

Soto v. Board of Education

10 A.D.3d 566 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 28, 2004

school bus operator Atlantic Express contends that the liability verdict against it is against the weight of the evidence, it was the jury’s prerogative to credit the infant *567 plaintiffs account of the accident (Resnick v … the infant plaintiff, a student passenger, a safe place to alight from the bus (see Miller v Fernán, 73 NY2d 844, 846 [1988]).

Hutchinson v. Zoning Board of Appeals

302 A.D.2d 526 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 18, 2003

The zoning board must apply the balancing test by considering each of the five factors enumerated in the statute, based upon the evidence before it (see Matter of Ifrah v Utschig, 98 NY2d 304, 307-308 [2002]; Matter of Khan … v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Vil. of Irvington, 87 NY2d 344, 351-352 [1996]).

Conklin v. Town Board of Warwick

59 A.D.2d 532 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 1, 1977

Corp. v Town of Greenburgh, 27 AD2d 947 ; Matter of Neddo v Schrade, 270 NY 97, 102-103 ). … The power to abolish the planning board is implied from the permissive language used to give town boards the right to appoint planning boards (see Town Law, § 271).

Brown v. Retsof Mining Co.

97 N.Y.S. 1130 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 2, 1906

Júdgment modified, by striking out the provision for an extra allowance, for want of power in the trial court to grant the same, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs, on the authority of Brown v.

Bruno v. Zoning Board of Appeals

286 A.D.2d 765 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 24, 2001

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Islip, dated April 18, 2000, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioners’ application for zoning variances … petitioners’ contention, the Supreme Court properly denied their cross motion, as the petitioners failed to demonstrate good cause or that the grant of an extension would serve the interest of justice (see, CPLR 306-b; Hafkin v

Paukovits v. Zoning Board of Appeals

67 A.D.2d 683 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 15, 1979

Petitioners, who are town residents, sought review of the determination before the respondent zoning board of appeals (the zoning board). … A "hobby” cannot constitute a lawful, nonconforming use (People v Miller, 304 NY 105 ).

Adams v. Board of Higher Education

263 A.D. 804 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 12, 1941