Peekskill Suburbs, Inc. v. Morabito
415 N.E.2d 977, 51 N.Y.2d 941, 434 N.Y.S.2d 989, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2775
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
On this record, it cannot be said that petitioner has established a legal infirmity in the denial of the change of zoning. Nor can we conclude that the refusal to grant the change is confiscatory, especially since the property is the subject of nonconforming uses which were not alleged or shown to be without economic value.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Peekskill Suburbs, Inc. v. Morabito, 415 N.E.2d 977, 51 N.Y.2d 941, 434 N.Y.S.2d 989, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2775 (N.Y. 1980).
415 N.E.2d 977 (Peekskill Suburbs, Inc. v. Morabito) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
F.M.V. Realty Co. v. Vecchio
150 A.D.2d 423 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Nogas v. Griffin
136 A.D.2d 939 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Save the Pine Bush, Inc. v. City of Albany
512 N.E.2d 526 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)
Northern Westchester Professional Park Associates v. Town of Bedford
458 N.E.2d 809 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
Repka v. Meyers
86 A.D.2d 770 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
James H. Maloy, Inc. v. Town Board of the Town of Guilderland
82 A.D.2d 1003 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)