Hyde Park Visual Environment Committee, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hyde Park Visual Environment Committee, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals

147 A.D.2d 447, 538 N.Y.S.2d 475, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1470

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 147 A.D.2d 447 (Hyde Park Visual Environment Committee, Inc. 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

Hyde Park Visual Environment Committee, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 147 A.D.2d 447, 538 N.Y.S.2d 475, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1470 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Hyde Park, dated October 2, 1987, which granted the respondent Redl’s application for a use variance, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Jiudice, J.), entered April 25, 1988, which dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated by Justice Jiudice in his memorandum decision dated April 25,1988.

We have considered those claims asserted by the petitioner which were not specifically addressed by the Supreme Court and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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 Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Hyde Park, dated October 2, 1987, which granted the respondent Redl’s application for a use variance, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Jiudice, J.), entered April 25, 1988, which dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated by Justice Jiudice in his memorandum decision dated April 25,1988.

We have considered those claims asserted by the petitioner which were not specifically addressed by the Supreme Court and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

147 A.D.2d 447, 538 N.Y.S.2d 475, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1470, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hyde-park-visual-environment-committee-inc-v-zoning-board-of-appeals-nyappdiv-1989.