Sagona v. Roth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sagona v. Roth

283 A.D.2d 582, 724 N.Y.S.2d 904, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5339

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

DecidedMay 21, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 283 A.D.2d 582 (Sagona v. Roth) 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

Sagona v. Roth, 283 A.D.2d 582, 724 N.Y.S.2d 904, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5339 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Incorporated Village of Massapequa Park, dated August 10, 1999, denying the petitioners’ application for a variance, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Carter, J.), entered March 21, 2000, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court correctly denied the petition. The respondents’ determination was rational and was supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Khan v Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 87 NY2d 344, 351-352; Matter of Johnson v Village of Westhampton Beach, 244 AD2d 335). Bracken, P. J., O’Brien, Smith and Cozier, 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 respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Incorporated Village of Massapequa Park, dated August 10, 1999, denying the petitioners’ application for a variance, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Carter, J.), entered March 21, 2000, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court correctly denied the petition. The respondents’ determination was rational and was supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Khan v Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 87 NY2d 344, 351-352; Matter of Johnson v Village of Westhampton Beach, 244 AD2d 335). Bracken, P. J., O’Brien, Smith and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D.2d 582, 724 N.Y.S.2d 904, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sagona-v-roth-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack