Matter of Rudey v. Landmarks Pres. Comm'n of the City of New York
627 N.E.2d 508, 82 N.Y.2d 832, 606 N.Y.S.2d 588, 1993 N.Y. LEXIS 4319
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order affirmed, with costs. It was arbitrary and capricious in the circumstances presented for the Landmarks Preservation Commission to differentiate between two residents in the *835 same building in setting the timetable for replacement of nonconforming windows in both units.
Concur: Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Hancock, Jr., Bellacosa and Levine. Taking no part: Judge Smith.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Matter of Rudey v. Landmarks Pres. Comm'n of the City of New York, 627 N.E.2d 508, 82 N.Y.2d 832, 606 N.Y.S.2d 588, 1993 N.Y. LEXIS 4319 (N.Y. 1993).
627 N.E.2d 508 (Matter of Rudey v. Landmarks Pres. Comm'n of the City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Michael R. Gianatasio, PE, P.C. v. City of New York
New York Supreme Court, 2016
Robles v. New York City Department of Citywide Administrative Services
48 Misc. 3d 888 (New York Supreme Court, 2014)
Delaware County Department of Social Services v. Pontonero
31 A.D.3d 999 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Rudey v. Brown, Harris, Steven, Inc.
254 A.D.2d 133 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)