113 Hillside Avenue Corp. v. Zaino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

113 Hillside Avenue Corp. v. Zaino

30 A.D.2d 559, 291 N.Y.S.2d 188, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3942

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 20, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 30 A.D.2d 559 (113 Hillside Avenue Corp. v. Zaino) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

113 Hillside Avenue Corp. v. Zaino, 30 A.D.2d 559, 291 N.Y.S.2d 188, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3942 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding under article 78 of the CPLR, the Board of Appeals of the Incorporated Village of Westbury appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated October 17, 1967, which (1) annulled the board’s denial of petitioner’s application for an area variance and (2) directed that the variance be granted. Judgment reversed, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and matter remitted to the appellant board for a new hearing, at which the proof may be considered in the light of the principles of law enunciated in Matter of Fulling v. Palumbo (21 N Y 2d 30), which was decided on December 7, 1967, subsequent to the decision herein of the learned Special Term. No questions of fact were considered on this appeal. In view of the determination in Fulling (supra) and in view of the board’s request that, if its determination be not sustained by this court, the matter be remitted to it for. a new hearing in accordance with the principles of law enunciated in Fulling (supra), the interests of justice require such remission. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hopkins and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In a proceeding under article 78 of the CPLR, the Board of Appeals of the Incorporated Village of Westbury appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated October 17, 1967, which (1) annulled the board’s denial of petitioner’s application for an area variance and (2) directed that the variance be granted. Judgment reversed, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and matter remitted to the appellant board for a new hearing, at which the proof may be considered in the light of the principles of law enunciated in Matter of Fulling v. Palumbo (21 N Y 2d 30), which was decided on December 7, 1967, subsequent to the decision herein of the learned Special Term. No questions of fact were considered on this appeal. In view of the determination in Fulling (supra) and in view of the board’s request that, if its determination be not sustained by this court, the matter be remitted to it for. a new hearing in accordance with the principles of law enunciated in Fulling (supra), the interests of justice require such remission. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hopkins and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.2d 559, 291 N.Y.S.2d 188, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3942, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/113-hillside-avenue-corp-v-zaino-nyappdiv-1968.