Circle Courts, Inc. v. Lane

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Circle Courts, Inc. v. Lane

29 A.D.2d 620, 285 N.Y.S.2d 931, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2822

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 7, 1967·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Determination unanimously confirmed, without costs. Memorandum: In confirming the determination by the Zoning Board of Appeals, we point out that the matter was improperly transferred to this court. Subdivision 7 of section 267 of the Town Law provides that in an article 78 proceeding brought to review a decision by a Zoning Board of Appeals the court at Special Term shall itself dispose of the cause on the merits, determining all questions which may be presented for determination. However, since CPLR 7804 (subd. [g]) continues the power in this court to dispose of all issues in a proceeding improperly transferred, we have considered the petition on the merits and have determined that the Zoning Board’s refusal to grant a variance should be confirmed under Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber (282 N. Y. 71). (Review of determination of Board of Zoning Appeals, refusing a variance, transferred by order of Erie Special Term.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henry and Del Vecehio, JJ.

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

Determination unanimously confirmed, without costs. Memorandum: In confirming the determination by the Zoning Board of Appeals, we point out that the matter was improperly transferred to this court. Subdivision 7 of section 267 of the Town Law provides that in an article 78 proceeding brought to review a decision by a Zoning Board of Appeals the court at Special Term shall itself dispose of the cause on the merits, determining all questions which may be presented for determination. However, since CPLR 7804 (subd. [g]) continues the power in this court to dispose of all issues in a proceeding improperly transferred, we have considered the petition on the merits and have determined that the Zoning Board’s refusal to grant a variance should be confirmed under Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber (282 N. Y. 71). (Review of determination of Board of Zoning Appeals, refusing a variance, transferred by order of Erie Special Term.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henry and Del Vecehio, JJ.

Circle Courts, Inc. v. Lane, 29 A.D.2d 620, 285 N.Y.S.2d 931, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2822 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

29 A.D.2d 620 (Circle Courts, Inc. v. Lane) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related