Rutland Parkway, Inc. v. Murdock

241 A.D. 762
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 15, 1934
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 241 A.D. 762 (Rutland Parkway, Inc. v. Murdock) 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
Rutland Parkway, Inc. v. Murdock, 241 A.D. 762 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. The rule adopted in Matter of McGarry v. Walsh (213 App. Div. 289) and in Matter of Riker v. Board of Standards & Appeals (225 id. 570) is not applicable to the present case. Here new conditions have arisen, due to changes in the neighborhood and the use of adjacent property, so that the application is in effect based on a new state of facts instead of constituting a reopening of a matter once decided. Furthermore, the granting of a variance is hedged about with conditions and limitations. (See Matter of Riverside St. Clair Corp. v. Walsh, 131 Misc. 652; affd., 225 App. Div. 655; Matter of Ficaro v. Walsh, 226 id. 441.) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Scudder, Tompkins and Davis, JJ.

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

Related

Fopeano v. Murdock
22 Misc. 2d 426 (New York Supreme Court, 1960)
Whittle v. Board of Zoning Appeals
125 A.2d 41 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
241 A.D. 762, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rutland-parkway-inc-v-murdock-nyappdiv-1934.