Syosset Holding Corp. v. Schlimm

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Syosset Holding Corp. v. Schlimm

4 A.D.2d 766, 164 N.Y.S.2d 890, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4825

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

DecidedJuly 8, 1957

StatusPublished

Cited by14 cases

This text of 4 A.D.2d 766 (Syosset Holding Corp. v. Schlimm) 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

Syosset Holding Corp. v. Schlimm, 4 A.D.2d 766, 164 N.Y.S.2d 890, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4825 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Incorporated Village of Hempstead and to direct the issuance of a permit, the appeal is from an order annulling the determination and directing the issuance of the permit. The determination sought to be reviewed denied an application for a variance to erect a gasoline filling station. Order modified by striking therefrom the second ordering paragraph. As so [767]*767modified order unanimously affirmed, without costs, and matter remitted to the zoning board of appeals for further factual evidence and findings based thereon which are susceptible of review as to the sufficiency of the supporting evidence. {People ex rel. Fordham M. S. Church V. Walsh, 244 N. Y. 280, 287; Matter of Elite Dairy Prods, v. Ten Eyck, 271 N. Y. 488, 498.) Present —Wenzel, Acting P. J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Incorporated Village of Hempstead and to direct the issuance of a permit, the appeal is from an order annulling the determination and directing the issuance of the permit. The determination sought to be reviewed denied an application for a variance to erect a gasoline filling station. Order modified by striking therefrom the second ordering paragraph. As so [767]*767modified order unanimously affirmed, without costs, and matter remitted to the zoning board of appeals for further factual evidence and findings based thereon which are susceptible of review as to the sufficiency of the supporting evidence. {People ex rel. Fordham M. S. Church V. Walsh, 244 N. Y. 280, 287; Matter of Elite Dairy Prods, v. Ten Eyck, 271 N. Y. 488, 498.) Present —Wenzel, Acting P. J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 A.D.2d 766, 164 N.Y.S.2d 890, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4825, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/syosset-holding-corp-v-schlimm-nyappdiv-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack