Town of Somers v. Camarco

284 A.D. 979, 135 N.Y.S.2d 42, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4288
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 15, 1954
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 284 A.D. 979 (Town of Somers v. Camarco) 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 Somers v. Camarco, 284 A.D. 979, 135 N.Y.S.2d 42, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4288 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1954).

Opinion

Action to enjoin defendants, for lack of a permit as provided for in a zoning ordinance, from excavating sand and gravel and using structures in connection therewith, and for other relief. Defendants counterclaimed for judgment declaring the provisions invoked by plaintiff to be void as in violation of their vested rights acquired prior to enactment of the zoning ordinance which had placed the parcels in a residence use district. Plaintiff appeals from a judgment for defendants, entered after trial, and from an order denying its motion for a new trial. Judgment modified on the law by striking therefrom the last ordering paragraph, which enjoins plaintiff from making any application to any court based upon the use of the premises contrary to an enumerated provision of the ordinance. The findings of fact are affirmed. As so modified, judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs. Order denying motion for new trial affirmed, without costs. At the trial the parties presented but one issue of fact, namely, whether the nonconforming use of the easterly parcel occurred prior to enactment of the ordinance. Plaintiff even objected to proof of operation of the westerly parcel inasmuch as there was no dispute as to prior operation thereon. The parties are bound by their own conduct defining the issues in the action and limiting the scope of the proof. The restraining provision in the judgment is inappropriate. No application of plaintiff can be barred in advance of its presentation (Matter of Robinson, 280 App. Div. 953, 954). Present — Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, MacCrate, Beldock and Murphy, JJ.

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

Related

Town of Somers v. Camarco Contractors, Inc.
24 Misc. 2d 673 (New York Supreme Court, 1960)
New York Trap Rock Corp. v. Town of Clarkstown
1 A.D.2d 890 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1956)
Mardine Realty Co. v. Village of Dobbs Ferry
1 A.D.2d 789 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
284 A.D. 979, 135 N.Y.S.2d 42, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4288, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/town-of-somers-v-camarco-nyappdiv-1954.