MATTER OF SEIDNER v. Town of Colonie
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The . order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
We agree with the court below that petitioner’s article 78 proceeding is untimely. (Town Law, §267, subd 7.) The record does not support petitioner’s contention that the respondent Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a rehearing on her application for a variance. In this regard, there is no proof that a majority of the members of the respondent board ever voted on petitioner’s request for a rehearing (Town Law, §267, subd 6) or that a rehearing was held upon the notice required by subdivision 5…
2Cited by23 opinions
- MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. Public Service CommissionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Chase v. Board of EducationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Cabrini Medical Center v. AxelrodAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Hunt Bros. Contractors, Inc. v. GlennonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Abrams v. Public Service CommissionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.