Alexander's Department Stores, Inc. v. Murdock

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Alexander's Department Stores, Inc. v. Murdock

265 A.D. 517, 39 N.Y.S.2d 823, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6340

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

DecidedFebruary 26, 1943

StatusPublished

This text of 265 A.D. 517 (Alexander's Department Stores, Inc. v. Murdock) 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

Alexander's Department Stores, Inc. v. Murdock, 265 A.D. 517, 39 N.Y.S.2d 823, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6340 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon the facts presented for decision to the Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York, it cannot be said that the Board might not reasonably conclude to deny the petitioners’ application. Accordingly, since the action of the Board was not arbitrary or capricious, the order of the Special Term which annulled the determination should be reversed.

The order appealed from should be reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion to vacate the order of certiorari and to confirm the determination of the Board of Standards and Appeals granted.

Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ., concur.

[518]*518Order unanimously reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion to vacate the order of certiorari and to confirm the determination of the Board of Standards and Appeals granted.’ ! ' r ' '' "

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

Per Curiam.

Upon the facts presented for decision to the Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York, it cannot be said that the Board might not reasonably conclude to deny the petitioners’ application. Accordingly, since the action of the Board was not arbitrary or capricious, the order of the Special Term which annulled the determination should be reversed.

The order appealed from should be reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion to vacate the order of certiorari and to confirm the determination of the Board of Standards and Appeals granted.

Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ., concur.

[518]*518Order unanimously reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion to vacate the order of certiorari and to confirm the determination of the Board of Standards and Appeals granted.’ ! ' r ' '' "

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D. 517, 39 N.Y.S.2d 823, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6340, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alexanders-department-stores-inc-v-murdock-nyappdiv-1943.