Riego Properties, Inc. v. Town of Hempstead

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Riego Properties, Inc. v. Town of Hempstead

20 A.D.3d 541, 797 N.Y.S.2d 912

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 18, 2005·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR Article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Hempstead, dated August 6, 2003, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner’s application for a building permit, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Martin, J.), entered April 30, 2004, which granted the petition, annulled the determination, and directed that the building permit be granted with appropriate conditions.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioner, Rieco Properties, Inc., commenced this proceeding to challenge a determination of the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Hempstead denying its application for a building permit for a construction and demolition debris processing facility. We affirm the Supreme Court’s annulment of the determination, as it was arbitrary and capricious and not supported by substantial evidence in the record (see Matter of Charles A. Field Delivery Serv. [Roberts], 66 NY2d 516 [1985]; Matter of Civic Assn. of Setaukets v Trotta, 8 AD3d 482 [2004]). H. Miller, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Skelos, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR Article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Hempstead, dated August 6, 2003, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner’s application for a building permit, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Martin, J.), entered April 30, 2004, which granted the petition, annulled the determination, and directed that the building permit be granted with appropriate conditions.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioner, Rieco Properties, Inc., commenced this proceeding to challenge a determination of the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Hempstead denying its application for a building permit for a construction and demolition debris processing facility. We affirm the Supreme Court’s annulment of the determination, as it was arbitrary and capricious and not supported by substantial evidence in the record (see Matter of Charles A. Field Delivery Serv. [Roberts], 66 NY2d 516 [1985]; Matter of Civic Assn. of Setaukets v Trotta, 8 AD3d 482 [2004]). H. Miller, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Skelos, JJ., concur.

Riego Properties, Inc. v. Town of Hempstead, 20 A.D.3d 541, 797 N.Y.S.2d 912 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

20 A.D.3d 541 (Riego Properties, Inc. v. Town of Hempstead) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related