Morton v. Mancari

Holding that the Indian Commerce Clause empowers Congress to “single Indians out as a proper subject for separate legislation.”

Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas

Holding that a zoning ordinance restricting the use of land to "one-family dwellings" did not in-fringe upon various constitutional rights because " quiet place where yards are wide, people few, and motor vehicles restricted are legitimate guidelines in a land-use project addressed to family needs" and it is permissible "to lay out zones where family values, youth values, and the blessings of quiet seclusion and clean air make the area a sanctuary for people."

Euclid v. Ambler Co.

Holding that a zoning ordinance that "greatly ... reduce[d] the value of appellee's lands and destroy[ed] their marketability for industrial, commercial and residential uses" constituted a "present invasion of appellee's property rights"

Gernatt Asphalt v. Sardinia

In Gernatt —decided after the legislature had codified Frew Run's holding in an amendment to the MLRL's supersession clause—the Town of Sardinia amended its zoning ordinance to eliminate all mining as a permitted use throughout the town.

DJL Restaurant Corp. v. City of New York

Finding separate levels of oversight can coexist when the impact is tangential

Chestnut v. Ramapo

Explaining how these concerns are environmental, and discussing provision in SEQRA covering community character

United States v. Town of Dryden (In re Norse Energy Corp.)

Holding that New York state law did not preempt municipal ordinance banning hydrocarbon extraction activities

Wal-Mart v. Planning Bd.

Frew Run Gravel Products, Inc. v. Town of Carroll

In Frew Run, we explained that although the preemptive reach of the operative text precluded any local law purporting to regulate the operations of mining activities, the limited carve-out allowed municipalities to adopt more stringent requirements for distinct reclamation operations, a result that was “consistent with the statute's overall aim of protecting the environment” (Frew Run, 71 N.Y.2d at 133, 524 N.Y.S.2d 25, 518 N.E.2d 920).

Huntington v. Park Shore

In Dix Hills, the New York Court of Appeals upheld a zoning ordinance that permitted the creation and operation of tennis courts by private, nonprofit clubs but prohibited commercial enterprises from maintaining identical facilities for use by the general public.