Dowd v. Nardy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dowd v. Nardy

50 A.D.2d 889, 377 N.Y.S.2d 524, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11788

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

DecidedDecember 29, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.2d 889 (Dowd v. Nardy) 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

Dowd v. Nardy, 50 A.D.2d 889, 377 N.Y.S.2d 524, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11788 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southampton which, after a hearing, granted a variance permitting the division of a parcel into single and separate lots, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered October 15, 1974, which dismissed the petition. Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs, and the matter is remitted to the respondent zoning board of appeals for (1) a new hearing at which it shall consider such proof as may be presented concerning whether practical difficulties exist and (2) a new determination. In the absence of proof of “practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships” the respondent board was without power, under the subject zoning ordinance, to grant the area variance sought (cf. Matter of Estate of Mandigo v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Vil. of Highland Falls, 45 AD2d 964). We decide no other question. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur; Cohalan, J., dissents and votes to affirm the judgment.

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

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southampton which, after a hearing, granted a variance permitting the division of a parcel into single and separate lots, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered October 15, 1974, which dismissed the petition. Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs, and the matter is remitted to the respondent zoning board of appeals for (1) a new hearing at which it shall consider such proof as may be presented concerning whether practical difficulties exist and (2) a new determination. In the absence of proof of “practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships” the respondent board was without power, under the subject zoning ordinance, to grant the area variance sought (cf. Matter of Estate of Mandigo v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Vil. of Highland Falls, 45 AD2d 964). We decide no other question. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur; Cohalan, J., dissents and votes to affirm the judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 889, 377 N.Y.S.2d 524, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11788, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dowd-v-nardy-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack