People ex rel. Hudson-Harlem Valley Title & Mortgage Co. v. Walker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Hudson-Harlem Valley Title & Mortgage Co. v. Walker

256 A.D. 1078, 11 N.Y.S.2d 159, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6203

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

DecidedApril 3, 1939

StatusPublished

This text of 256 A.D. 1078 (People ex rel. Hudson-Harlem Valley Title & Mortgage Co. v. Walker) 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

People ex rel. Hudson-Harlem Valley Title & Mortgage Co. v. Walker, 256 A.D. 1078, 11 N.Y.S.2d 159, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6203 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Petitioner, the owner of an unimproved lot in a business B district, applied to the zoning board of appeals of the town of New Castle for a variance to permit the erection of a building with a setback of six instead of ten feet, as required by the ordinance. The application was denied. Upon certiorari to review the action of the board of appeals the official referee, to whom the matter was referred to hear and determine, reversed the determination of the board, granted the variance and directed the issuance of a permit to petitioner. Order reversed on the law, with costs, certiorari proceeding dismissed and the deter[1079]*1079mination of the zoning board of appeals reinstated and confirmed. In our opinion the evidence is insufficient to establish that the ordinance is unreasonable or that petitioner has been deprived of the beneficial use of its property. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

Petitioner, the owner of an unimproved lot in a business B district, applied to the zoning board of appeals of the town of New Castle for a variance to permit the erection of a building with a setback of six instead of ten feet, as required by the ordinance. The application was denied. Upon certiorari to review the action of the board of appeals the official referee, to whom the matter was referred to hear and determine, reversed the determination of the board, granted the variance and directed the issuance of a permit to petitioner. Order reversed on the law, with costs, certiorari proceeding dismissed and the deter[1079]*1079mination of the zoning board of appeals reinstated and confirmed. In our opinion the evidence is insufficient to establish that the ordinance is unreasonable or that petitioner has been deprived of the beneficial use of its property. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D. 1078, 11 N.Y.S.2d 159, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-hudson-harlem-valley-title-mortgage-co-v-walker-nyappdiv-1939.