Lynn v. Planning Board of the Town of East Hampton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lynn v. Planning Board of the Town of East Hampton

89 A.D.3d 1028, 933 N.Y.2d 567

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 22, 2011·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

There is no evidence in this record that the respondent’s determination was illegal, arbitrary, or an abuse of discretion (see Matter of Fairway Manor, Inc. v Bertinelli, 81 AD3d 821, 823 [2011]; Matter of Commercial Real Asset Mgt. Inc. v Kessler, 38 AD3d 542, 543 [2007]). The petitioners failed to demonstrate a material change of circumstances since the time of the initial approval of the plat or submit new evidence which would warrant modification of the subdivision plat approved in 1995 (Matter of 1066 Land Corp. v Planning Bd. of Town of Austerlitz, 218 AD2d 887, 887 [1995]; Matter of Marx v Planning Bd. of Vil. of Mill Neck, 185 AD2d 348, 349 [1992]).

The petitioners’ remaining contentions are without merit.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition [1029]*1029and dismissed the proceeding. Leventhal, J.E, Hall, Austin and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

There is no evidence in this record that the respondent’s determination was illegal, arbitrary, or an abuse of discretion (see Matter of Fairway Manor, Inc. v Bertinelli, 81 AD3d 821, 823 [2011]; Matter of Commercial Real Asset Mgt. Inc. v Kessler, 38 AD3d 542, 543 [2007]). The petitioners failed to demonstrate a material change of circumstances since the time of the initial approval of the plat or submit new evidence which would warrant modification of the subdivision plat approved in 1995 (Matter of 1066 Land Corp. v Planning Bd. of Town of Austerlitz, 218 AD2d 887, 887 [1995]; Matter of Marx v Planning Bd. of Vil. of Mill Neck, 185 AD2d 348, 349 [1992]).

The petitioners’ remaining contentions are without merit.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition [1029]*1029and dismissed the proceeding. Leventhal, J.E, Hall, Austin and Miller, JJ., concur.

Lynn v. Planning Board of the Town of East Hampton, 89 A.D.3d 1028, 933 N.Y.2d 567 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

89 A.D.3d 1028 (Lynn v. Planning Board of the Town of East Hampton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related