Rosenberg v. Kaplan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rosenberg v. Kaplan

254 A.D.2d 293, 678 N.Y.S.2d 275, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10095

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

DecidedOctober 5, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 254 A.D.2d 293 (Rosenberg v. Kaplan) 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

Rosenberg v. Kaplan, 254 A.D.2d 293, 678 N.Y.S.2d 275, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10095 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Wesley Hills dated October 16, 1996, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner’s application for a certification of a nonconforming use and an area variance, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Bergerman, J.), dated April 15, 1997, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition, as the determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Wesley Hills was supported by substantial evidence in the record and was neither arbitrary nor capricious (see, Matter of Sasso v Osgood, 86 NY2d 374; Matter of Fuhst v Foley, 45 NY2d 441; Matter of Rizzo v Board of Appeals on Zoning, 247 AD2d 543; Matter of Turner v Organ, 240 AD2d 507). Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Ritter and Altman, 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 Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Wesley Hills dated October 16, 1996, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner’s application for a certification of a nonconforming use and an area variance, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Bergerman, J.), dated April 15, 1997, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition, as the determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Wesley Hills was supported by substantial evidence in the record and was neither arbitrary nor capricious (see, Matter of Sasso v Osgood, 86 NY2d 374; Matter of Fuhst v Foley, 45 NY2d 441; Matter of Rizzo v Board of Appeals on Zoning, 247 AD2d 543; Matter of Turner v Organ, 240 AD2d 507). Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Ritter and Altman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 293, 678 N.Y.S.2d 275, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10095, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosenberg-v-kaplan-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack