Dentine v. Valvo
This text of 77 A.D.2d 643 (Dentine v. Valvo) 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.
Opinion
In anaction for a permanent injunction to enjoin defendant from continuing to use certain premises as a chiropractor’s office, plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered February 22, 1980, which, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the complaint. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Although Special Term did not so expressly find, our review of the record reveals that plaintiff has not proved that defendant’s office is not "an accessory to” his residence, within the meaning of the zoning ordinance in question. Accordingly, the judgment should be affirmed. Damiani, J. P., Gibbons, Margett and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
77 A.D.2d 643, 430 N.Y.S.2d 137, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12371, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dentine-v-valvo-nyappdiv-1980.