Town of Somerset v. Perry

115 A.D.2d 313, 495 N.Y.S.2d 875, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54585
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 15, 1985·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and application granted, in accordance with the following memorandum: Respondents’ conversion of their property from a bargain store to a diner constituted a change of a nonconforming use under the town’s zoning ordinance for which a variance was required (Matter of Off Shore Rest. Corp. v Linden, 30 NY2d 160). In granting the variance the town’s requirement that respondents obtain a use variance with conditions was warranted. The record indicates that two conditions imposed by the town were violated. Moreover, since respondents failed to timely file a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge the conditions contained in the variance, they are foreclosed from challenging them on appeal (see, Matter of Wolfram v Abbey, 55 AD2d 700; Town of N. Hempstead v De Feo, 27 AD2d 860). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Sedita, J.—permanent injunction.) Present— Dillon, P. J., Denman, Boomer, Green and O’Donnell, JJ.

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

Town of Somerset v. Perry, 115 A.D.2d 313, 495 N.Y.S.2d 875, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54585 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

115 A.D.2d 313 (Town of Somerset v. Perry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rudolf Steiner Fellowship Foundation v. De Luccia
685 N.E.2d 192 (New York Court of Appeals, 1997)
Brewer v. Zoning Board of Appeals
236 A.D.2d 875 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Board of Commissioners v. Board of Zoning & Appeals
188 A.D.2d 464 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Proskin v. Donovan
150 A.D.2d 937 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)