Greenberg v. Board of Managers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Greenberg v. Board of Managers

294 A.D.2d 467, 742 N.Y.S.2d 560, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5180

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

DecidedMay 20, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 294 A.D.2d 467 (Greenberg v. Board of Managers) 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

Greenberg v. Board of Managers, 294 A.D.2d 467, 742 N.Y.S.2d 560, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5180 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, for injunctive relief, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leviss, J.H.O.), dated September 1, 2000, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against it, among other things, enjoining it from prohibiting the plaintiffs from erecting a Succah on the balcony of their condominium unit.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs’ request for a permanent injunction, since the condominium’s governing board acted outside the scope of its authority in prohibiting them from erecting a Succah on the balcony of their condominium unit (see Matter of Levandusky v One Fifth Ave. Apt. Corp., 75 NY2d 530).

[468]*468The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J.P., Florio, O’Brien and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, for injunctive relief, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leviss, J.H.O.), dated September 1, 2000, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against it, among other things, enjoining it from prohibiting the plaintiffs from erecting a Succah on the balcony of their condominium unit.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs’ request for a permanent injunction, since the condominium’s governing board acted outside the scope of its authority in prohibiting them from erecting a Succah on the balcony of their condominium unit (see Matter of Levandusky v One Fifth Ave. Apt. Corp., 75 NY2d 530).

[468]*468The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J.P., Florio, O’Brien and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 467, 742 N.Y.S.2d 560, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greenberg-v-board-of-managers-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack