DeVito v. Zoning Board of Appeals

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeVito v. Zoning Board of Appeals

68 A.D.3d 861, 889 N.Y.2d 482

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

DecidedDecember 8, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 68 A.D.3d 861 (DeVito v. Zoning Board of Appeals) 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

DeVito v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 68 A.D.3d 861, 889 N.Y.2d 482 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the respondent’s determination was not arbitrary and capricious (see generally Matter of Sasso v Osgood, 86 NY2d 374, 385 [1995]; Matter of Halperin v City of New Rochelle, 24 AD3d 768, 772 [2005]). There was ample evidence in the record to support the respondent’s conclusion that the fuel oil delivery business owned by the petitioner had been extended unlawfully to her nearby residential premises, and that the use of an oil delivery truck at those premises in conjunction with the neighboring commercial enterprise constituted an unauthorized business use of the prop[862]*862erty under the Code of the City of Poughkeepsie § 19-3.13 (2) (see generally City of Yonkers v Rentways, Inc., 304 NY 499, 503 [1952]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. Mastro, J.P., Belen, Hall and Austin, JJ., concur.

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

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the respondent’s determination was not arbitrary and capricious (see generally Matter of Sasso v Osgood, 86 NY2d 374, 385 [1995]; Matter of Halperin v City of New Rochelle, 24 AD3d 768, 772 [2005]). There was ample evidence in the record to support the respondent’s conclusion that the fuel oil delivery business owned by the petitioner had been extended unlawfully to her nearby residential premises, and that the use of an oil delivery truck at those premises in conjunction with the neighboring commercial enterprise constituted an unauthorized business use of the prop[862]*862erty under the Code of the City of Poughkeepsie § 19-3.13 (2) (see generally City of Yonkers v Rentways, Inc., 304 NY 499, 503 [1952]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. Mastro, J.P., Belen, Hall and Austin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 A.D.3d 861, 889 N.Y.2d 482, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/devito-v-zoning-board-of-appeals-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack