Lo Cascio v. Kristensen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lo Cascio v. Kristensen

280 A.D. 835, 113 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3859

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

DecidedJune 30, 1952

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 280 A.D. 835 (Lo Cascio v. Kristensen) 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

Lo Cascio v. Kristensen, 280 A.D. 835, 113 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3859 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

Action for a judgment declaring illegal and void a certain ordinance of the City of Yonkers, adopted by the Common Council of that city in 1945 and known as General Ordinance No. 50-1945, amending the city’s zoning ordinance and accompanying map hy changing the zone classification of a stated area, and for injunctive relief. Judgment dismissing the complaint upon the merits, after trial, unanimously affirmed, with one bill of costs to respondents. The power to amend, supplement or change the zoning ordinance is granted by section 83 of the General City Law, and the questioned ordinance was adopted in compliance with that section. (Cf. Homefield Assn, of Yonkers v. Frank, 273 App. Div. 788, affd. 298 N. Y. 524; Bohlman v. City of Yonkers, 275 App. Div. 842.) Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Wenzel and MaeCrate, JJ.

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

Action for a judgment declaring illegal and void a certain ordinance of the City of Yonkers, adopted by the Common Council of that city in 1945 and known as General Ordinance No. 50-1945, amending the city’s zoning ordinance and accompanying map hy changing the zone classification of a stated area, and for injunctive relief. Judgment dismissing the complaint upon the merits, after trial, unanimously affirmed, with one bill of costs to respondents. The power to amend, supplement or change the zoning ordinance is granted by section 83 of the General City Law, and the questioned ordinance was adopted in compliance with that section. (Cf. Homefield Assn, of Yonkers v. Frank, 273 App. Div. 788, affd. 298 N. Y. 524; Bohlman v. City of Yonkers, 275 App. Div. 842.) Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Wenzel and MaeCrate, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

280 A.D. 835, 113 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lo-cascio-v-kristensen-nyappdiv-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack