Case law

Lucas v. Board of Appeals of Village of Mamaroneck

93 A.D.3d 844 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 27, 2012

Thus, the petitioners should have named and joined the Director as a party to this proceeding (see Ferrick v State of New York, 198 AD2d 822 [1993]; D.B.C.G., Inc. v Town of Ramapo, 97 AD2d 533 [1983]). … This was error, as the petitioners failed to show that they would suffer an irreparable injury in the absence of the temporary restraint (see Tesone v Hoffman, 84 AD3d 1219 [2011]; see generally Dover Gourmet Corp. v Nassau

Bartley v. New York City Board of Education

54 A.D.3d 564 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 2, 2008

Clifton-Fine Central School Board of Education v. Wisner

59 A.D.2d 50 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 4, 1977

to agree to arbitrate certain matters (see Board of Educ. v Areman, 41 NY2d 527 ; Matter of Cohoes City School Dist. v Cohoes Teachers Assn., 40 NY2d 774, 778 ; Matter of Susquehanna Val. … The power of a board of education to grant or deny tenure without explanation to the teacher is not subject to arbitration (Matter of Morris Cent. School Dist. Bd. of Educ. v Morris Educ.

Belle v. Town Board of the Town of Onondaga

61 A.D.2d 352 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 1, 1978

, mod on other grounds 40 NY2d 908 ; Matter of Policemen’s Benevolent Assn. of Westchester County v Board of Trustees of Vil. of Croton-on-Hudson, 21 AD2d 693 ; see, also, Matter of Fritz v Huntington Hosp., 39 NY2d 339 … (See Matter of Merrin v Town Bd. of Town of Kirkwood, 48 AD2d 992 ; Matter of Zeidler v Board of Supervisors of County of Suffolk, 35 AD2d 54 .)

Mielnicki v. New York State Board of Elections

224 A.D.2d 819 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 15, 1996

the Board on petitioners’ behalf. … ; Matter of Goldstein v Carlsen, 59 AD2d 642, 643 , affd 42 NY2d 993 ).

Larkin v. Town Board of Town of Fleming

52 A.D.2d 1068 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 28, 1976

of the Town of Fleming (Board). … validity of the petition process used in creation of the water district (see Reister v Town Bd. of Town of Fleming, 18 NY2d 92 , affg 24 AD2d 548 ).

Brady v. Town of Islip Zoning Board of Appeals

65 A.D.3d 1337 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 29, 2009

Trust v Board of Zoning Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 98 NY2d 190, 195 [2002]; see Matter of North Shore Steak House v Board of Appeals of Inc. Vil. of Thomaston, 30 NY2d 238, 243 [1972]). … Trust v Board of Zoning Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 98 NY2d 190, 195 [2002]).

Board of Education v. Yonkers Federation of Teachers

81 A.D.2d 585 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 6, 1981

forth those matters as follows: “In September, 1979, a number of elementary teachers were assigned to teach classes of mixed-grade students in violation of 5 different provisions of the contract *** Sections II, B; XV; XX,V; … Where, as here, the arbitration provisions broadly embrace all claimed violations of the agreement, any ambiguity is a matter for the arbitrator to resolve (see Board of Educ. v New York State United Teachers, 51 NY2d 994

Pisano v. New York City Board of Education

303 A.D.2d 735 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 31, 2003

disability was not caused by her accident (see Brugman v City of New York, 64 NY2d 1011 [1985]; see also Abiele Contr. v New York City School Constr. … Auth., 91 NY2d 1 [1997]; Werner v State of New York, 53 NY2d 346 [1981]; Sampson v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 191 AD2d 283 [1993]). The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit.

Board of Directors of Windsor Owners Corp. v. Platt

138 A.D.3d 500 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Apr 12, 2016

motion to “renew” was based on any new facts not known to her at the time of the original motion, and as such, the appeal is deemed to be from a motion to reargue (CPLR 2221), the denial of which is not appealable (see Belok v

Gorman v. Town Board of Town of East Hampton

273 A.D.2d 235 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 5, 2000

, 146 AD2d 842 ; Town of Oyster Bay v New York Tel. … Ventures Corp. v Foster, 71 NY2d 359 ; cf., Vitiello v City of Yonkers, 255 AD2d 506 ).

Steinson v. Board of Education

76 N.Y.S. 1034 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · May 9, 1902

Niebauer v. Board of Elections

76 A.D.2d 660 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 18, 2010

.; see Matter of Frisa v McCarthy, 298 AD2d 457, 458 [2002]; Matter of Frisa v O’Grady, 297 AD2d 394, 395 [2002]). CPLR 3021 sets forth the form of verification. … Since the petition was not verified as mandated by Election Law § 16-116, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition (see Matter of Alper v *661 Hayduk, 71 AD2d 935 [1979]; but see Matter of Rose v Smith, 220 AD2d

Freihofer v. Lake George Zoning Board of Appeals

137 A.D.2d 894 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 18, 1988

Corp. v Murdock, 285 NY 298, 304 ; see also, FGL & L Prop. Corp. v City of Rye, 66 NY2d 111, 115 ). … Accordingly, we conclude that the Board’s interpretation of the former ordinance was not irrational (see, Appelbaum v Deutsch, 66 NY2d 975, 977 ; Matter of Frampton v Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 114 AD2d 670 ).

Board of Education v. State Division of Human Rights

109 A.D.2d 988 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 21, 1985

Pace Coll, v Commission on Human Rights, supra). … At the hearing, petitioner produced three school board members who gave several reasons for Stott’s selection, particularly his more recent classroom experience as a substitute teacher at one of petitioner’s schools, his

Shepard v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Johnstown

92 A.D.2d 993 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 10, 1983

delegation of power to an administrative agency without standards (Matter of Tandem Holding Corp. v Board of Zoning Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 43 NY2d 801, 802 , supra; 2 Anderson, New York Zoning Law and Practice [2d … Matter of Ehret v Bates, 18 AD2d 938 ).

Bruno v. New York State Board of Elections

208 A.D.2d 877 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 28, 1994

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition is granted to the extent that the certificate of nomination is declared invalid, and the New York State Board of Elections is … Contrary to the Supreme Court’s finding, Kenneth Rudolph is not a necessary party (see, CPLR 1001 [a]; Matter of Castracan v Colavita, 173 AD2d 924 ).

Brown v. New York City Transit Authority

295 A.D.2d 384 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 10, 2002

In an action such as this, the plaintiff’s damages include the loss of use of the guide dog for the time she was deprived of its use (see Mountain View Coach Lines v Storms, 102 AD2d 663, 665 ; see also Blauvelt v Cleveland … , 198 App Div 229 ; Stettner v Graubard, 82 Misc 2d 132 ).

People ex rel. Nash v. Board of Supervisors

164 A.D. 89 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 21, 1914

Smart v. Board of Supervisors, 66 App. Div. 66, 71 .) … Brown v. Bd. of Supers. Onondaga Co., 4 N. Y. Cr. Rep. 102; affirmed, 102 N. Y. 691 .)

Greencove Associates, LLC v. Town Board of North Hempstead

87 A.D.3d 1066 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Sep 20, 2011

In 1999, the Town Board of the Town of North Hempstead (hereinafter the Town Board) approved the petitioner’s site plan application to expand the shopping center, subject, among other things, to conditions that required certain … Rather, the question before us is “whether the determination was affected by an error of law, or was arbitrary and capricious or an abuse of discretion, or was irrational” (Matter of Zupa v Board of Trustees of Town of Southold