§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Colin Realty Co., LLC, Appellant,v.Town of North Hempstead, et al., Respondents.

Brief

35 Cited authorities

  1. 300 Gramatan v. Human Rights

    45 N.Y.2d 176 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 2,302 times
    In 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights (45 NY2d 176), we stated that "substantial evidence consists of proof within the whole record of such quality and quantity as to generate conviction in and persuade a fair and detached fact finder that, from that proof as a premise, a conclusion or ultimate fact may be extracted reasonably — probatively and logically" (id. at 181).

  2. In the Matter of Halperin v. City of New Rochelle

    24 A.D.3d 768 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)   Cited 441 times
    In Halperin v City of New Rochelle, 24 AD3d 768, 809 NYS2d 98 (2d Dept 2005), the court held that a "substantial evidence" question arises "only where a quasi-judicial evidentiary hearing has been held."

  3. Matter of Sasso v. Osgood

    86 N.Y.2d 374 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 515 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Reversing and granting Article 78 petition to annul zoning board decision

  4. Matter of Featherstone v. Franco

    95 N.Y.2d 550 (N.Y. 2000)   Cited 385 times
    Affirming rejection of Article 78 case

  5. Pecoraro v. Bd. of Appeals

    2 N.Y.3d 608 (N.Y. 2004)   Cited 344 times   1 Legal Analyses

    59. Argued March 23, 2004. Decided May 4, 2004. APPEAL, by permission of the Court of Appeals, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, entered April 21, 2003. The Appellate Division modified, on the law, an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Anthony L. Parga, J.), entered in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, which annulled respondent's determination denying petitioner's application for an area variance and remitted the matter

  6. In Matter of Yarbough v. Franco

    95 N.Y.2d 342 (N.Y. 2000)   Cited 351 times
    In Matter of Yarbough v. Franco, 95 N.Y.2d 342, 717 N.Y.S.2d 79, 740 N.E.2d 224 [2000], the Court held that a tenant's application to vacate a default judgment extended the four-month limitations period.

  7. Matter of Cowan v. Kern

    41 N.Y.2d 591 (N.Y. 1977)   Cited 404 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[w]here there is a rational basis for the local decision, that decision should be sustained. It matters not whether, in close cases, a court would have, or should have, decided the matter differently"

  8. Matter of Fanelli v. N.Y. City Conciliation

    90 A.D.2d 756 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)   Cited 205 times

    November 30, 1982 Judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Blangiardo, J.), entered February 19, 1982, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the application denied, the petition dismissed and the determination of appellant New York City Conciliation and Appeals Board (CAB), dated April 9, 1981, upholding the intervenor-appellant's right to a renewal of his lease under subdivision A of section 23 and sections 50 and 60 of the Code of the Rent Stabilization Association of New York

  9. N. Shore Steak House v. Thomaston

    30 N.Y.2d 238 (N.Y. 1972)   Cited 175 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In North Shore Steak House, the zoning ordinance of the Village of Thomaston contained a provision specifically authorizing the zoning board of appeals to grant special permits "`subject to appropriate conditions and safeguards, and in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this ordinance'" (id., at p 242). No such provision granting the zoning board of appeals the power to condition special use permits existed in the City of Johnstown's zoning ordinance at the time petitioner made his application in the instant case.

  10. Matter of Twin County Recycling Corp. v. Yevoli

    90 N.Y.2d 1000 (N.Y. 1997)   Cited 80 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Matter of Twin County Recycling Corp. v. Yevoli (90 NY2d 1000, 1002), we recognized that a board is not without discretion in deciding whether to grant a special use permit.