Town of Hempstead v. DeMasco

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Town of Hempstead v. DeMasco

62 A.D.3d 692, 877 N.Y.S.2d 700

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

DecidedMay 5, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 62 A.D.3d 692 (Town of Hempstead v. DeMasco) 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

Town of Hempstead v. DeMasco, 62 A.D.3d 692, 877 N.Y.S.2d 700 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to permanently enjoin the defendants from operating a junkyard or scrap metal business, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Galasso, J.), entered September 10, 2008, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the defendants and against it denying a permanent injunction.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Upon review of a determination rendered after a nonjury trial, this Court’s authority “is as broad as that of the trial court,” and this Court may “render the judgment it finds warranted by the facts, taking into account in a close case the fact that the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses” (Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford, 60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983]). We discern no basis to disturb the Supreme Court’s determination.

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. Fisher, J.P., Miller, Chambers and Austin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to permanently enjoin the defendants from operating a junkyard or scrap metal business, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Galasso, J.), entered September 10, 2008, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the defendants and against it denying a permanent injunction.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Upon review of a determination rendered after a nonjury trial, this Court’s authority “is as broad as that of the trial court,” and this Court may “render the judgment it finds warranted by the facts, taking into account in a close case the fact that the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses” (Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford, 60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983]). We discern no basis to disturb the Supreme Court’s determination.

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. Fisher, J.P., Miller, Chambers and Austin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 A.D.3d 692, 877 N.Y.S.2d 700, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/town-of-hempstead-v-demasco-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack