Parkway Village Equities Corp. v. Board of Standards & Appeals

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Parkway Village Equities Corp. v. Board of Standards & Appeals

279 A.D.2d 299, 720 N.Y.S.2d 6, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 233

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

DecidedJanuary 11, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 279 A.D.2d 299 (Parkway Village Equities Corp. 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

Parkway Village Equities Corp. v. Board of Standards & Appeals, 279 A.D.2d 299, 720 N.Y.S.2d 6, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 233 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered on or about June 19, 2000, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding, brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, to vacate a resolution of respondent Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York dated February 15, 2000, which reversed a determination of additional respondent Department of Buildings of the City of New York revoking building permits issued to additional respondent Bahar Group, L. L. C., unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The authority charged with enforcing New York City Zoning Resolution § 12-10 is respondent Board of Standards and Appeals (BSA), and since the questions raised concerning the application of that Zoning Resolution related to BSA’s expertise, the court properly accorded the BSA’s interpretation of the relevant subdivisions of Zoning Resolution § 12-10 (Zoning Lot, subds [a], [d]) “great weight and judicial deference,” such interpretation having been “neither irrational, unreasonable nor inconsistent with the governing statute” (Matter of Trump-Equitable Fifth Ave. Co. v Gliedman, 62 NY2d 539, 545; accord, Matter of Toys “R” Us v Silva, 89 NY2d 411, 418-419).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Williams, Mazzarelli and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered on or about June 19, 2000, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding, brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, to vacate a resolution of respondent Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York dated February 15, 2000, which reversed a determination of additional respondent Department of Buildings of the City of New York revoking building permits issued to additional respondent Bahar Group, L. L. C., unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The authority charged with enforcing New York City Zoning Resolution § 12-10 is respondent Board of Standards and Appeals (BSA), and since the questions raised concerning the application of that Zoning Resolution related to BSA’s expertise, the court properly accorded the BSA’s interpretation of the relevant subdivisions of Zoning Resolution § 12-10 (Zoning Lot, subds [a], [d]) “great weight and judicial deference,” such interpretation having been “neither irrational, unreasonable nor inconsistent with the governing statute” (Matter of Trump-Equitable Fifth Ave. Co. v Gliedman, 62 NY2d 539, 545; accord, Matter of Toys “R” Us v Silva, 89 NY2d 411, 418-419).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Williams, Mazzarelli and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

279 A.D.2d 299, 720 N.Y.S.2d 6, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 233, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parkway-village-equities-corp-v-board-of-standards-appeals-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack