Incorporated Village of Hempstead v. Howe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Incorporated Village of Hempstead v. Howe

203 A.D.2d 983, 612 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4403

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

DecidedApril 15, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 203 A.D.2d 983 (Incorporated Village of Hempstead v. Howe) 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

Incorporated Village of Hempstead v. Howe, 203 A.D.2d 983, 612 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4403 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: We conclude that the Commissioner’s determination is supported by substantial evidence. Petitioner failed to meet its burden of proof by adducing clear and convincing evidence that the establishment of the proposed residential facility for developmentally disabled adults would result in "both an overconcentration of similar facilities and a substantial alteration of the nature and character of the community” (Matter of Town of Hempstead v Commissioner of State of N. Y. Off. of Mental Health, 170 AD2d 1052; see also, Matter of Town of Hempstead v Commissioner of State of N. Y. Off. of Mental Health, 166 AD2d 709). (Article 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Nassau County, Goldstein, J.) Present — Green, J. P., Balio, Fallon, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: We conclude that the Commissioner’s determination is supported by substantial evidence. Petitioner failed to meet its burden of proof by adducing clear and convincing evidence that the establishment of the proposed residential facility for developmentally disabled adults would result in "both an overconcentration of similar facilities and a substantial alteration of the nature and character of the community” (Matter of Town of Hempstead v Commissioner of State of N. Y. Off. of Mental Health, 170 AD2d 1052; see also, Matter of Town of Hempstead v Commissioner of State of N. Y. Off. of Mental Health, 166 AD2d 709). (Article 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme Court, Nassau County, Goldstein, J.) Present — Green, J. P., Balio, Fallon, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

203 A.D.2d 983, 612 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4403, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/incorporated-village-of-hempstead-v-howe-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack