Case law

Parrish v. Moss

200 Misc. 375 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 18, 1951

Peixotto v. Board of Education ( 212 N. … law. ’ ’ So, also, in Matter of Shapiro v.

Holy Sepulchre Cemetery v. Town of Greece

191 Misc. 241 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 26, 1947

(Matter of Kress & Co. v. Dept. of Health, supra; Matter of Oltarsh v. Levy, 242 App. Div. 617 , affd. sub nom. People ex rel. Oltarsh v. Levy, 266 N. Y. 523 ; People v. Lewis, 295 N. Y. 42 .) … (Moritz v. United Brethrens Church, 269 N. Y. 125, 133 , and cases there cited.) It may delegate its power to the town board. (Green Point Sav. Bank v. Zoning Appeals Board, 281 N. Y. 534, 538 .)

People ex rel. Facey v. Leo

110 Misc. 516 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1920

Beinert v. Miller, 188 App. Div. 113 , it was said that the board of estimate had no authority to delegate to the board of appeals the power to modify the zoning resolution. … In view of them there can be no question that authority is lodged in the board of appeals to vary the regulations in exceptional cases in the inter *519 ests of justice. People ex rel. McAvoy v. Leo, 109 Misc.

Weinberg v. Town of Clarkstown

78 Misc. 2d 464 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 5, 1973

The court has read Berkey v. Downing ( 68 Misc 2d 595 , affd. 39 A D 2d 1008), Brechner v. Incorporated Vil. of Lake Success ( 25 Misc 2d 920 ) and Marcus v. Village of Mamaroneck ( 283 N. … An administrative board may not delegate its quasi-judicial and discretionary function to subordinates (Matter of Kilgus v. Board of Estimate of City of N. Y., 308 N. Y. 620 ; 1 N. Y.

Schwartz v. Chave

53 Misc. 2d 1007 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 8, 1967

Since it did not do so, the Board of Appeals, which is without legislative power, may not read such a limitation into the section Matter of Community Synagogue v. Bates, 1 N Y 2d 445, 455). *1010 Matter of Weinstein v. … 12 of the ordinance (Matter of Barry v.

Leider v. Beth Israel Hospital Ass'n

33 Misc. 2d 3 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1960

The question before this court turns on whether the foregoing provisions of the constitution and by-laws of the medical board spell out a contract which divests defendant’s board of trustees of the right to determine who … (Manczur v. Southside Hosp., 16 Misc 2d 989 ; Van Campen v. Olean Gen. Hosp., 210 App. Div. 204 , affd. 239 1ST. Y. 615; Loewinthan v. Beth David Hosp., 9 N. Y. S. 2d 367; People ex rel. Cline v. Roll, 126 N. Y, 180.)

Evans v. Meisser

31 Misc. 2d 329 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 29, 1961

Law provides the sole remedy in a situation such as this or whether petitioner’s signature to the Evans-Ewald petition estops hi in from making his present application, the court holds that the *330 determination of the Board

Burkle v. Ells

4 How. Pr. 288 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1849

In Brown v. … In the 3d Wendell, 158, Bank of Orange v.

Persico v. Guernsey

129 Misc. 190 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1927

(Moore v. Burrows, 34 Barb. 173, 174 ; Champion v. Brown, 6 Johns. Ch. 398 ; Griffith v. Beecher, 10 Barb. 432 ; Rood v. N. Y. & Erie R. R. Co., 18 id. 80, 83; Palmer v. Morrison, 104 N. Y. 132, 138 ; Abate v. … The case of Brownell v. Board of Education ( 239 N. Y. 369 ), cited by plaintiffs’ counsel, is not in point.

Marone v. Nassau County

39 Misc. 3d 1034 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 24, 2013

It is “special damage, different in kind and degree from the community generally” (Matter of Sun-Brite Car Wash v Board of Zoning & Appeals of Town of N. … Board of Trustees of Vil. of Croton-on-Hudson, 21 AD2d 693 [2d Dept 1964]; Matter of Andresen v Rice, 277 NY 271 [1938]).

People ex rel. Bradley v. Stephens

2 Abb. Pr. 348 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1866

A similar suggestion was made in relation to the act amending the city charter, in Phillips v. The Mayor, &c., (1 Hilton, 483). In Baldwin v. … In the People v. Stevens ( 5 Hill, 616 , 627), such an application was denied, on the ground that a better remedy existed, and that another claimed the office under color of title. In the People v. Dikeman ( 7 How.

Syosset Holding Corp. v. Schlimm

15 Misc. 2d 10 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1956

A showing of unnecessary and unique hardship is prerequisite to a use variance (Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber, 282 N. Y. 71 ) but such proof is not necessary for a special exception permit. … of Community Synagogue v.

Central School District No. 2 of Towns of Coeymans v. New York State Teachers Retirement System

46 Misc. 2d 225 · New York Supreme Court · May 3, 1965

(Board), the individual members of the Board and C. … (Matter of O’Connell v. Kern, 287 N. Y. 297, 301 ; Matter of Williams v. Morton, 297 N. Y. 328, 334 ; Matter of Gimprich v. Board of Educ. of City of N. 7., 306 N. Y. 401, 405 .)

Blum v. Mcgraw

92 Misc. 2d 781 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1977

The Court of Appeals recently restated the standards for judicial review of zoning board decisions, in Matter of Cowan v Kern ( 41 NY2d 591 , 599): "Absent arbitrariness, it is for *784 locally selected and locally responsible … McGowan v Cohalan, 41 NY2d 434 .)

In re the Multer

156 Misc. 564 · New York Supreme Court · Sep 3, 1935

(Matter of Burr v. Voorhis, 229 N. Y. 382, 388 .) … (Matter of Wicksel v.

S.B. v. J.R.

43 Misc. 3d 171 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 19, 2013

They agreed that the term “cost” would include “transportation, tuition, students[’] fees, room and board, books and supplies, personal and transportation, sharing the costs of pre-college examinations and applications.” … (See Brown v Entertainment Merchants Assn., 564 US —, —, 131 S Ct 2729, 2741 [2011].) At least one New York court has suggested the phrase “nor good red herring” should follow this idiom.

Smith v. City of Rochester

19 N.Y.S. 459 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1892

That this provision of the charter is constitutional, since the recent decision of the court of appeals in the case of McNally v. City of Cohoes, 127 N. Y. 350 , 27 N. E. … Rep. 1043, following, in principle, the case of Todd v. City of Troy, 61 N. Y. 309 , admits of no doubt.

City Trust, Safe Deposit & Surety Co. v. Waldhauer

47 Misc. 7 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1905

In Sinsheimer v. … Master Stevedores’ Assn. v.

Loudin v. Mohawk Airlines, Inc.

44 Misc. 2d 926 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 18, 1964

v. … Plaintiff relies on Ellish v. Goldman (117 N. Y.

Connecticut River Estates, Inc. v. Luchsinger

52 Misc. 2d 620 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 13, 1967

lacking (Narragansett Inn v. … Absent some basis for a reconsideration, upon proper notice and hearing, the Planning Board was without the ability and power to revoke a final approval resolved (Matter of Northbury Estates v. Long Is. Light.