Vinti v. Finkelstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vinti v. Finkelstein

275 A.D.2d 956

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

DecidedJune 20, 1949

StatusPublished

This text of 275 A.D.2d 956 (Vinti v. Finkelstein) 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

Vinti v. Finkelstein, 275 A.D.2d 956 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

In our opinion the facts warranted the commission’s determination that respondent Alfonso Yinti had failed to establish a compelling necessity for the premises. There is no basis for a finding that the action of the commission was arbitrary or capricious and the court may not substitute its judgment for that of the commission (Matter of Kinsman v. Finkelstein, 274 App. Div. 895; Matter of Keller v. Coster, 274 App. Div. 932). Nolan, P. J., Cars-well, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur. [195 Misc. 43.]

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

In our opinion the facts warranted the commission’s determination that respondent Alfonso Yinti had failed to establish a compelling necessity for the premises. There is no basis for a finding that the action of the commission was arbitrary or capricious and the court may not substitute its judgment for that of the commission (Matter of Kinsman v. Finkelstein, 274 App. Div. 895; Matter of Keller v. Coster, 274 App. Div. 932). Nolan, P. J., Cars-well, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur. [195 Misc. 43.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 956, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vinti-v-finkelstein-nyappdiv-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack