MATTER OF NEW YORK CITY HOUS. & REDEVELOPMENT BD. v. Foley

New York Court of Appeals

MATTER OF NEW YORK CITY HOUS. & REDEVELOPMENT BD. v. Foley

213 N.E.2d 686, 16 N.Y.2d 1071

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 1, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 213 N.E.2d 686 (MATTER OF NEW YORK CITY HOUS. & REDEVELOPMENT BD. v. Foley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

MATTER OF NEW YORK CITY HOUS. & REDEVELOPMENT BD. v. Foley, 213 N.E.2d 686, 16 N.Y.2d 1071 (N.Y. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

16 N.Y.2d 1071 (1965)

In the Matter of the New York City Housing and Redevelopment Board, Appellant,
v.
Max H. Foley et al., Constituting the Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.
In the Matter of Amalia V. Betanzos et al., Appellants,
v.
Max H. Foley et al., Constituting the Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York.

Argued October 25, 1965. Decided December 1, 1965.

Sol A. Liebman for New York City Housing and Redevelopment Board, appellant.

Edward Robin for Amalia V. Betanzos and others, appellants.

Charles F. Preusse, William T. Farley and Ansley Kime for Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Incorporated, respondent.

Leo A. Larkin, Corporation Counsel (Rose Schneph of counsel), for Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York, respondent.

Norman Marcus for New York City Planning Commission, amicus curiๆ.

Concur: Chief Judge DESMOND and Judges DYE, FULD, VAN VOORHIS, BURKE, SCILEPPI and BERGAN.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

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