Raimonda v. Cahn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Raimonda v. Cahn

26 A.D.2d 549, 271 N.Y.S.2d 604, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4057

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

DecidedJune 6, 1966

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 26 A.D.2d 549 (Raimonda v. Cahn) 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

Raimonda v. Cahn, 26 A.D.2d 549, 271 N.Y.S.2d 604, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4057 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to compel the removal of a fence on defendants’ real property, allegedly erected and maintained by them in violation of the Building Zone Ordinance and Building Code of the Town of Huntington, plaintiffs, who own real property adjacent to that of defendants, appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered January 4, 1966, which denied their motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. In our opinion, the affidavits raise a factual issue as to whether plaintiffs sustained special damages entitling them to bring the action (cf. Cord Meyer Development Co. v. Bell Bay Drugs, 25 A D 2d 744 and cases there cited). We pass upon no other question. Beldock, P. J., Brennan, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to compel the removal of a fence on defendants’ real property, allegedly erected and maintained by them in violation of the Building Zone Ordinance and Building Code of the Town of Huntington, plaintiffs, who own real property adjacent to that of defendants, appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered January 4, 1966, which denied their motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. In our opinion, the affidavits raise a factual issue as to whether plaintiffs sustained special damages entitling them to bring the action (cf. Cord Meyer Development Co. v. Bell Bay Drugs, 25 A D 2d 744 and cases there cited). We pass upon no other question. Beldock, P. J., Brennan, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 549, 271 N.Y.S.2d 604, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4057, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raimonda-v-cahn-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack