Legal Opinion
Spinosa v. Ackerman
New York Supreme Court
Decided March 28, 1979PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*1074OPINION OF THE COURT
Robert H. Wagner, J.
Two issues are presented for determination by the court. The first issue is whether the petitioners are time barred by section 274-a of the Town Law from taking an appeal from the decision of the planning board. The second issue is whether the Planning Board of the Town of Penfield, which has the sole power of final site plan approval, acted properly in approving the petitioners’ final site plan conditionally upon the town board’s consent and upon the town board’s subsequent rejection, refusing to issue final approval.
I find petitioners are not time…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Nemeroff Realty Corp. v. KerrAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972
- Stanley v. Board of AppealsNew York Supreme Court · 1938
- Town of Porter v. Chem-Trol Pollution Services, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- Nemeroff Realty Corp. v. KerrNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
- Boxer v. Town BoardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Kuhn v. Town of JohnstownAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Webster Associates v. Town of WebsterNew York Supreme Court · 1981
- Capitol Real Estate, Inc. v. Town Board of CharltonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- King v. ChmielewskiNew York Supreme Court · 1988
- Opn. No., New York Attorney General Reports1982