Legal Opinion

Fix v. City of Rochester

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 20, 1966PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtG. Robert Wither, J.

Petitioners have brought this article 78 CPLR proceeding for an order annulling the action of respondent City Council in amending tlieir Genesee Crossroads Urban Renewal Plan to include real estate at number 34 State Street, Rochester, New York. Petitioners are office tenants in the building at number 34 State Street and they assert that respondents’ action is illegal and arbitrary and results in undue hardship to the “ residents ” thereof in violation of law.

It appears that pursuant to article 15 of the General Municipal Law, enacted in 1961 (L. 1961, ch. 402), authorizing urban renewal…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Rodgers v. Village of TarrytownNew York Court of Appeals · 1951
  2. Kaskel v. ImpellitteriNew York Court of Appeals · 1953
  3. Bar Harbour Shopping Center, Inc. v. AndrewsNew York Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Rodin v. Director of PurchasingNew York Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Gellis v. ClarkNew York Supreme Court · 1961

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. City of Buffalo Urban Renewal Agency v. MoretonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  2. Jefferson v. City of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Fisher v. BeckerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1969
  4. Board of Supervisors v. State Department of Social ServicesNew York Supreme Court · 1968
  5. Schenectady Urban Renewal Agency v. BucciNew York Supreme Court · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API