Case law

Plumstead v. Zoning Board of Appeals

14 Conn. Supp. 87 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · Apr 4, 1946

The court is not permitted “to substitute its finding and con' elusions for the decision of the board.” Blake v. Board of Appeals, 117 Conn. 527, 532 . … Heimov v. Thomson, 131 Conn. 8, 14 . Hence there is no merit to the board’s argument on this score.

Bayer v. Zoning Board of Appeals

11 Conn. Supp. 476 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · Mar 11, 1943

Memorandum of decision on appeal from action of zoning board of appeals. BORDON, J. … An appeal from the decision of the board does not require or permit the court, by trial de novo, to substitute its finding and conclusions for the decision of the board.

Pima Gro Systems, Inc. v. Zoning Appeals Board

47 Va. Cir. 356 · King George County Circuit Court · Nov 17, 1998

Foster v. Geller, 248 Va. 563 (1994). Although the court may take additional evidence, § 15.2-2314, the proceeding is not a trial de novo, Ashland v. … The BZA correctly cites Board of Zoning Appeals v. University Sq. Ass ’n, 246 Va. 290 (1993), for the proposition that a reviewing court has authority only to examine issues decided by the BZA.

Defelice v. Zoning Board of Appeals

11 Conn. Supp. 18 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · Apr 20, 1942

Zoning Board of Appeals, 126 Conn. 228, 237, citing Blake vs. Board of Appeals, 117 id. 527, 532, and Holley vs. Sunderland, 110 id. 80, 82. … Zoning Board of Appeals, supra, p. 238) but for aught that appears it was considered by the board.

Zingeser v. Zoning Board of Appeals

10 Conn. Supp. 339 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · Jan 15, 1942

Board of Adjustment, Jersey City, 122 NJ.L. 292, 293. … Zoning Board of Appeals, 118 Conn. 174 .

Queens Village Civic Organization v. Board of Education

14 Misc. 2d 546 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 1, 1958

Defendants contend that plaintiffs’ remedy lies in a special proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act and that in any event a taxpayer’s action does not lie against a Board of Education. … The Court of Appeals has held that a Board of Education is not a municipal corporation within the meaning of the statute authorizing a taxpayer’s action. (Schnepel v. Board of Educ. of City of Rochester, 302 N. Y. 94 .)

In re Frame

69 Misc. 568 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1910

William Brown as trustees, the board of trastees failed to determine by lot which of the two persons, namely, Frank P. Oole and Napoleon B. Bertrand, should be deemed elected president. … Robinson v. Burns, 106 App. Div. 36 , as an authority requiring the reconvening of the old board; but the conditions under consideration in that case were very different from those presented in this case.

People ex rel. Fraser v. Board of Auditors

2 N.Y.S. 609 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1888

Bowen v. Lease, 5 Hill, 225 ; People v. Supervisors, 73 N. Y. 173 ; People v. Supervisors, 85 N. Y. 323, 330 . … Mongeon v. People, 55 N. Y. 613 .

Conyers v. Pinellas County Board of Public Instruction

33 Fla. Supp. 5 · Circuit Court of the 6th Judicial Circuit of Florida, Pinellas County · Sep 19, 1969

Everything from dancing lessons to how to saw a board to body hygiene.

People ex rel. McSpedon v. Board of Supervisors

10 Abb. Pr. 233 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1859

Many of the objections taken to the granting of this writ are of a purely technical character, not involving the merits, and are ¡such as should not be relied on by the Board of Supervisors in refusing to carry out the provisions … Canal Board, 13 Barb., 444 , are cases so holding.) It will not be pretended that these relators, at the present time, have any such claim.

Fairfax-Falls Church Community Services Board v. Olson

38 Va. Cir. 477 · Fairfax County Circuit Court · Mar 14, 1996

Di Sano v. Storandt

43 Misc. 2d 272 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 12, 1964

Respondents lay great stress on the landmark decision of the Supreme Court (Brown v. Board of Educ., 347 U. S. 483 ) and attempt to draw an analogy between de jure and de facto segregation. … (Brown v. Board of Educ., 139 F. Supp. 468, 470 .) In Briggs v. Elliott ( 132 F. Supp. 776, 777 ) the court said: ‘ ‘ The Constitution, in other words, does not require integration. It merely forbids discrimination.”

Loudoun County Board of Supervisors v. Jefferson

83 Va. Cir. 464 · Loudoun County Circuit Court · Oct 20, 2011

Chapter 1450 provides that the Affordable Dwelling Unit Advisory Board, consisting of members appointed by the plaintiff, has the authority to regulate the sale of affordable dwelling units (ADUs). … Powell v. Adams, 179 Va. 170, 174 (1942). See also Schmidt & Wilson, Inc. v.

Sodha v. New York State Board of Law Examiners

105 Misc. 2d 159 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 26, 1980

This court may not substitute its judgment for that of a duly constituted Board of Law Examiners in the evaluation of an applicant’s qualifications to practice a profession (Matter of Erlanger v Regents of Univ. of State … Matter of Levi v Regents of Univ. of State of N. Y., 281 NY 627 ).

Hill v. New York State Board of Elections

132 Misc. 2d 221 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1986

Co. v Durkin, 276 App Div 394 , affd 301 NY 376 [1950]; Matter of Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am. v Chapman, 302 NY 226 [1951]). … Fire & Life Assur. *225 Corp. v Martino, 12 Misc 2d 935 [1958]; Matter of New York Ambassador v Board of Stds. & Appeals of City of N.

Moore v. State of Illinois, Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board

30 Ill. Ct. Cl. 146 · Court of Claims of Illinois · Oct 25, 1974

Stein v. State of Illinois, Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board

30 Ill. Ct. Cl. 117 · Court of Claims of Illinois · Sep 26, 1974

Barco Video v. State of Illinois, Capital Development Board

30 Ill. Ct. Cl. 449 · Court of Claims of Illinois · Mar 31, 1975

Whalen v. State of Illinois, Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board

30 Ill. Ct. Cl. 117 · Court of Claims of Illinois · Sep 26, 1974

Kenville Realty Corp. v. Board of Zoning Appeals

48 Misc. 2d 666 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 14, 1965

A Board of Zoning Appeals must be furnished a sufficient standard or rule by which its actions are to be governed (Matter of Little v. Young, 274 App. Div. 1005 , affd. 299 N. Y. 699 ). … But other eminent authority has ruled to the contrary (see, e.g., Ours Props. v. Ley, 198 Va. 848 [Sup. Ct., Va., 1957]; Walls v. City of Guntersville, 45 So. 2d 468 [Sup. Ct., Ala., 1950]).