Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
4.78s
Longwood Associates v. Board of Assessors
58 A.D.2d 581 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 6, 1977
Ambroad Equities v Miller, 289 NY 339 ), and that the receiver herein had an interest in keeping the litigation alive for the tax year 1974/1975. … Co. v Stark Mobile Homes, 39 AD2d 514 ).
Cited 1 timesPublishedCorbeau Construction Corp. v. Board of Education
32 A.D.2d 958 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 14, 1969
Richards v. Hylan, 200 App. Div. 871 ; Matter of colcagnini v. Burns, 216 N. Y. S. 2d 465). Moreover, the respondent Board is not being charged with the violation of a statutory duty (see Matter of Phalen v. … State Comm. for Human Rights v.
Cited 26 timesPublishedParkway Associates v. Board of Assessors
202 A.D.2d 431 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 7, 1994
The Board of Education of the Hauppauge Union Free School District passed its opt-out resolution on June 24, 1986, to take effect on January 1, 1987. … Partnership v Astafan ( 185 AD2d 687 ), which is relied upon by petitioner, is factually inapposite and not controlling.
Cited 2 timesPublished118 A.D.3d 893 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 18, 2014
The City’s Planning Board (hereinafter the Planning Board) issued a negative declaration (see 6 NYCRR 617.7 [a] [2]; Matter of Troy Sand & Gravel Co., Inc. v Town of Nassau, 82 AD3d 1377, 1378 [2011]) with respect to LaPerch … Homeowners Assn. v Hathaway Realty, 305 AD2d 390, 391 [2003]), and the Planning Board’s contentions to the contrary are without merit.
Cited 0 timesPublished118 A.D.3d 893 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 18, 2014
The City’s Planning Board (hereinafter the Planning Board) issued a negative declaration (see 6 NYCRR 617.7 [a] [2]; Matter of Troy Sand & Gravel Co., Inc. v Town of Nassau, 82 AD3d 1377, 1378 [2011]) with respect to LaPerch … Homeowners Assn. v Hathaway Realty, 305 AD2d 390, 391 [2003]), and the Planning Board’s contentions to the contrary are without merit.
Cited 0 timesPublishedPascual v. State Board of Law Examiners
79 A.D.2d 1054 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 15, 1981
from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered February 21,1980 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioners’ application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to annul a determination of the State Board … Cole, 286 NY 202 ; Matter of Sodha v New York State Bd. of Law Examiners, 105 Misc 2d 159 ).
Cited 7 timesPublishedVantage Petroleum v. Board of Assessment Review
91 A.D.2d 1037 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 24, 1983
v Board of Assessors of Town of Nelson, 49 Misc 2d 499 , affd sub nom. … Matter of Fieser v Board of Assessors of Town of Nelson, 24 AD2d 1045 ).
Cited 35 timesPublishedImhof v. Zoning Board of Appeals
13 A.D.3d 626 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 27, 2004
Thus, the determination of a zoning board must be sustained upon judicial review if it has a rational basis and is supported by substantial evidence (see Matter of Ifrah v Utschig, 98 NY2d 304, 308 [2002]; Matter of Sasso … v Osgood, 86 NY2d 374, 384-385 [1995]).
Cited 1 timesPublished118 A.D.3d 1419 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 20, 2014
Bd. of Appeals, 67 AD3d 1467, 1467 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of New York Botanical Garden v Board of Stds. & Appeals of City of N.Y., 91 NY2d 413, 419 [1998]). … vested in local planning boards” (Matter of Valentine v McLaughlin, 87 AD3d 1155, 1157 [2011], lv denied 18 NY3d 804 [2012], citing Town Law § 274-a [2] [a]).
Cited 0 timesPublishedKurth v. Orange County Board of Elections
65 A.D.3d 642 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 20, 2009
“A proceeding with respect to a petition shall be instituted within fourteen days after the last day to file the petition, or *643 within three business days after the officer or board with whom or which such petition was … The last day to file designating petitions was July 16, 2009 (see Election Law § 6-158 [1]), and the Orange County Board of Elections ruled on July 17, 2009, that the petitioner’s designating petition was invalid.
Cited 5 timesPublishedGreystone Management Corp. v. Conciliation & Appeals Board
94 A.D.2d 614 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 5, 1983
Assoc. v Lenox Hill Hosp., 38 NY2d 525 ; Matter of Century Operating Corp. v Prince, 75 AD2d 536 .) … Assoc. v Lenox Hill Hosp. ( 76 Misc 2d 892,893 , affd 47 AD2d 513 , affd 38 NY2d 525 ): “It has also been well established that determinations by the board [CAB] are to *617 be reviewed only by an article 78 proceeding and
Cited 29 timesPublishedRosbar Co. v. Board of Appeals
67 A.D.2d 709 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 22, 1979
Accordingly, the matter must be remitted to the board for a new hearing solely on the issue of change of use. … More than a mere change in name or a slight variation in clientele must be shown (see Shegda v Village of Lancaster, 192 Mise 560, affd 274 App Div 1087 ).
Cited 1 timesPublishedBrown v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority
295 A.D.2d 267 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 27, 2002
Cited 0 timesPublishedDefreestville Area Neighborhood Ass'n v. Planning Board
16 A.D.3d 715 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 3, 2005
Assoc., 183 AD2d 874 [1992]; see also Matter of Colella v Board of Assessors of County of Nassau, 95 NY2d 401 [2000]; Society of Plastics Indus. v County of Suffolk, supra; Matter of Sun-Brite Car Wash v Board of Zoning … v Board of Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 2 NY3d 608, 613 [2004] [citations omitted]). 10 Moreover, “[a] determination of a zoning board should be sustained on judicial review if it has a rational basis and is supported by
Cited 25 timesPublishedHamburger v. Board of Estimate and Apportionment
109 A.D. 427 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 15, 1905
Examining the question on its merits — in the case relied on (Baker v. City of New York, 56 App. … of estimate and apportionment and the board of aldermen.” .
Cited 8 timesPublished118 A.D.3d 1419 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 20, 2014
Bd. of Appeals, 67 AD3d 1467, 1467 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of New York Botanical Garden v Board of Stds. & Appeals of City of N.Y., 91 NY2d 413, 419 [1998]). … vested in local planning boards” (Matter of Valentine v McLaughlin, 87 AD3d 1155, 1157 [2011], lv denied 18 NY3d 804 [2012], citing Town Law § 274-a [2] [a]).
Cited 0 timesPublishedW.O.R.C. Realty Corp. v. Board of Assessors
100 A.D.3d 75 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 12, 2012
Div.] v Unmack, 92 NY2d at 188 ; Matter of Commerce Holding Corp. v Board of Assessors of Town of Babylon, 88 NY2d 724, 732 [1996]). … Corp. v Board of Assessors of County of Nassau, 108 AD2d 493, 500 [1985]).
Cited 7 timesPublishedPoczatek v. Zoning Board of Appeals
26 A.D.2d 556 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 13, 1966
Plonski, 13 A D 2d 704, affd. 10 N Y 2d 1035; Matter of Gordon v. Plonski, 9 N Y 2d 886; Matter of Paliotto v. Dickerson, 22 A D 2d 929). … City of Buffalo, 4 N Y 2d 553; Town of Somers v. Camarco, 308 N. Y. 537 ; People v. Miller, 304 N. Y. 105 ; Matter of Downey v.
Cited 2 timesPublishedShields v. Zoning Board of Appeals
164 A.D.2d 909 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 20, 1990
Servs. v Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 110 AD2d 135 , affd 67 NY2d 702 )” (Matter of Wolfson v Curcio, 150 AD2d 586, 587 ). … P., Brown, Kunzeman and Harwood, JJ., concur.
Cited 2 timesPublishedWal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Planning Board
238 A.D.2d 93 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 5, 1998
Respondent, the Planning Board of the Town, assumed lead agency status for the ensuing review of the project pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (ECL art 8 [hereinafter SEQRA]), and in May 1995 petitioner … Home Constr. v Van Wagner, 41 NY2d 1028, 1029 ).
Cited 30 timesPublished
Ask Donna