Legal Opinion

Unitarian Universalist Church v. Shorten

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 28, 1970PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBernard S. Meyer, J.

In a prior memorandum (64 Misc 2d 851), movants Bridener and Jaeka were held entitled as of right to intervene after judgment for the purpose of litigating their aggrievement by the court’s earlier decision (63 Misc 2d 978) and judgment in this article 78 proceeding. The memorandum so holding noted that a hearing was necessary ‘ ‘ in view of the existing church use and other surrounding circumstances and the subtle distinctions involved in assaying the difference between the conditions that will exist with the added day care use and those now existing without the use.” The hearing having been…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Marcus v. Village of MamaroneckNew York Court of Appeals · 1940
  2. Rice v. Van VrankenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1929
  3. Rice v. Van VrankenNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
  4. Unitarian Universalist Church of Central Nassau v. ShortenNew York Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Unitarian Universalist Church v. ShortenNew York Supreme Court · 1970

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Vantage Petroleum, Bay Isle Oil Co., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Review of the Town of BabylonNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. Osman v. SternbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  3. Douglaston Civic Ass'n v. GalvinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1973
  4. Flushing National Bank v. Municipal Assistance Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1977
  5. In re the Estate of MayerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1981

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API