Legal Opinion

Town of Southampton v. Equus Associates, Ltd.

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

Decided August 8, 1994PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Miller, J.

The primary issue presented on these two appeals is whether the appellant’s proposed use of its leased property to raise, train and sell polo ponies constitutes "agricultural production” within the meaning of Agriculture and Markets Law § 301, and therefore should have been permitted by the Town of Southampton. We hold that it does and accordingly reverse the judgments on appeal and grant the petition of Equus Associates, Ltd. and dismiss the complaint of the Town of Southampton.

The instant appeals stem from attempts by appellant Equus *212Associates, Ltd.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Kinderhill Farm Breeding Associates v. WalkerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
  2. New York Standardbred Farm Owners, Inc. v. Agriculture & New York State Horse Breeding Development FundNew York Supreme Court · 1972

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Equus Associates, Ltd v. Town of SouthamptonDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1999
  2. Equus Associates Ltd. v. Town of SouthamptonDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API