Mar Mar Realty Associates v. Board of Standards & Appeals

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mar Mar Realty Associates v. Board of Standards & Appeals

119 A.D.2d 752, 501 N.Y.S.2d 161, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55680

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

DecidedApril 21, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 119 A.D.2d 752 (Mar Mar Realty Associates v. Board of Standards & 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

Mar Mar Realty Associates v. Board of Standards & Appeals, 119 A.D.2d 752, 501 N.Y.S.2d 161, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55680 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York, dated March 23, 1983, which denied its application for a permit to install 10 video games in its bowling alley, the petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunkin, J.), dated November 21, 1983, which dismissed the proceeding.

[753]*753Order and judgment affirmed, with costs.

On this record we conclude that the petitioner did not establish that the installation of 10 video games in its bowling alley would be an accessory use to the bowling alley. Lazer, J. P., Brown, Weinstein and Niehoff, 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 Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York, dated March 23, 1983, which denied its application for a permit to install 10 video games in its bowling alley, the petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunkin, J.), dated November 21, 1983, which dismissed the proceeding.

[753]*753Order and judgment affirmed, with costs.

On this record we conclude that the petitioner did not establish that the installation of 10 video games in its bowling alley would be an accessory use to the bowling alley. Lazer, J. P., Brown, Weinstein and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

119 A.D.2d 752, 501 N.Y.S.2d 161, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55680, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mar-mar-realty-associates-v-board-of-standards-appeals-nyappdiv-1986.