Rapaport v. Village of Port Chester

27 A.D.2d 850, 278 N.Y.S.2d 248, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4594
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 20, 1967·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated October 3, 1966, modified, on the law, by striking out the first and third decretal paragraphs thereof and by adding a provision remitting the matter to the appellant Village Board of Trustees for a full hearing and the making of specific findings in support of any decision the board may thereupon make. As so modified, judgment affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, petitioners were entitled to notice and hearing if the Board of Trustees intended not to renew the dancing and entertainment license granted to them each year since 1961 (Matter of Hecht v. Monaghan, 307 N. Y. 461, 468). In addition, petitioners were entitled to have specific findings made as to the reasons for the denial of the renewal license, not only by reason of the provisions of section 3 of the Ordinance to Regulate Dancing, etc., but also to permit the court to evaluate such reasons in light of the proof adduced. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hopkins and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

Rapaport v. Village of Port Chester, 27 A.D.2d 850, 278 N.Y.S.2d 248, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4594 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

27 A.D.2d 850 (Rapaport v. Village of Port Chester) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Carroll v. Hastings
93 Misc. 2d 390 (New York Supreme Court, 1977)