Bierker v. Town of Clarkstown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bierker v. Town of Clarkstown

81 A.D.2d 601, 437 N.Y.S.2d 720, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11086

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

DecidedApril 13, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 81 A.D.2d 601 (Bierker v. Town of Clarkstown) 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

Bierker v. Town of Clarkstown, 81 A.D.2d 601, 437 N.Y.S.2d 720, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11086 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action to declare an amendment to the zoning ordinance of the Town of Clarkstown invalid and void as it applies to certain property owned by defendant Beverly Degenshein, and for injunctive relief, plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered March 25, 1980, which, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint and granted judgment in favor of the defendants. Judgment modified, on the law, by deleting the provisions which dismissed the complaint outright and substituting therefor provisions (1) declaring that the amendment to the zoning ordinance by the respondent town board was not invalid or void (see Rodgers v Village of Tarrytown, 302 NY 115; Goodrich v Town of Southampton, 39 NY2d 1008) and (2) otherwise dismissing the complaint. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with one bill of costs payable jointly to respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs. In a declaratory judgment action, the court should not dismiss merely because the plaintiffs are not entitled to the declaration sought by them. A declaration should have been made (see Lanza v Wagner, 11 NY2d 317, 334, app dsmd 371 US 74). Titone, J.P., Gibbons, O’Connor and Thompson, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action to declare an amendment to the zoning ordinance of the Town of Clarkstown invalid and void as it applies to certain property owned by defendant Beverly Degenshein, and for injunctive relief, plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered March 25, 1980, which, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint and granted judgment in favor of the defendants. Judgment modified, on the law, by deleting the provisions which dismissed the complaint outright and substituting therefor provisions (1) declaring that the amendment to the zoning ordinance by the respondent town board was not invalid or void (see Rodgers v Village of Tarrytown, 302 NY 115; Goodrich v Town of Southampton, 39 NY2d 1008) and (2) otherwise dismissing the complaint. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with one bill of costs payable jointly to respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs. In a declaratory judgment action, the court should not dismiss merely because the plaintiffs are not entitled to the declaration sought by them. A declaration should have been made (see Lanza v Wagner, 11 NY2d 317, 334, app dsmd 371 US 74). Titone, J.P., Gibbons, O’Connor and Thompson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 A.D.2d 601, 437 N.Y.S.2d 720, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11086, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bierker-v-town-of-clarkstown-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack