Legal Opinion · Dissent

Schadow v. Wilson

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

Decided July 1, 1993Published

1DissentMahoney, J.

I agree with the majority that the State’s Mined Land Reclamation Law (ECL art 23, tit 27) was not intended to preempt the provisions of the Town of Ballston Zoning Law that require a special use permit for the conducting of a sand and gravel mining operation within the municipality. In my view, however, respondents’ denial of petitioner’s application for a special use permit, based as it was upon what I perceive to be general objections, conclusory findings and pure conjecture, lacks a rational basis. Under firmly established precedent, denial of a special use permit upon such intangibles…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Matter of Robert Lee Realty Co. v. Vill. of Spring ValleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. MATTER OF MKT. SQUARE PROPS., LTD. v. Town of Guilderland Zoning Bd. of AppealsNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
  3. Huntington Health Care Partnership v. Zoning Board of AppealsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
  4. Kidd-Kott Construction Co. v. LillisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
  5. Pilato v. Zoning Board of AppealsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989

1 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