Fleming v. Choate

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fleming v. Choate

8 A.D.2d 969, 190 N.Y.S.2d 741, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7504

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

DecidedJuly 28, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 8 A.D.2d 969 (Fleming v. Choate) 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

Fleming v. Choate, 8 A.D.2d 969, 190 N.Y.S.2d 741, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7504 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act (1) to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Rye which denied an application for a variance of the strict application of front and rear yard setback requirements of the local building zone ordinance with respect to a proposed construction of a dwelling on a plot which is located in a district in which, under the said ordinance, the use of land is restricted to residences, churches and other places of worship, and (2) to direct the building inspector of said city to issue a building permit for construction of a dwelling on said plot as proposed, the appeal is from an order dismissing the proceeding. Order reversed, without costs, determination annulled, and the matter remitted to the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals for further proceedings not inconsistent with the views herein stated. A reasonable variance should have been granted by said board (see Matter of Richards v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 285 App. Div. 287; Matter of Waldorf v. Coffey, 5 Misc 2d 80). Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act (1) to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Rye which denied an application for a variance of the strict application of front and rear yard setback requirements of the local building zone ordinance with respect to a proposed construction of a dwelling on a plot which is located in a district in which, under the said ordinance, the use of land is restricted to residences, churches and other places of worship, and (2) to direct the building inspector of said city to issue a building permit for construction of a dwelling on said plot as proposed, the appeal is from an order dismissing the proceeding. Order reversed, without costs, determination annulled, and the matter remitted to the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals for further proceedings not inconsistent with the views herein stated. A reasonable variance should have been granted by said board (see Matter of Richards v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 285 App. Div. 287; Matter of Waldorf v. Coffey, 5 Misc 2d 80). Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.2d 969, 190 N.Y.S.2d 741, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7504, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fleming-v-choate-nyappdiv-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack