Chizner v. Walsh

236 A.D. 731
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 15, 1932
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 236 A.D. 731 (Chizner v. Walsh) 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
Chizner v. Walsh, 236 A.D. 731 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

Opinion

Order sustaining certiorari order and annulling the determination of the board of standards and appeals reversed on the law and the facts, with costs, certiorari proceeding dismissed, and the determination reinstated and confirmed. In our opinion the record does not establish that the site, if devoted to conforming uses, would not yield a fair or proper return on the investment. The board of standards and appeals had a discretionary duty in the matter and there is no warrant in the record to ascribe to it an arbitrary determination. The mere fact that variances were granted in other instances in the locality “ affords no valid reason ” for insisting on a variance in the present case. (People ex rel. Werner v. Walsh, 212 App. Div. 635; affd., 240 N. Y. 689.) (See, also, Matter of Goldenberg v. Walsh, 215 App. Div. 396, at p. 401; revd., on dissenting opinion, in 242 N. Y. 576.) Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty, Scudder and Davis, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Conwall Realty Corp. v. Murdock
285 A.D. 951 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1955)
Socony Vacuum Oil Co. v. Murdock
165 Misc. 713 (New York Supreme Court, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
236 A.D. 731, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chizner-v-walsh-nyappdiv-1932.