Bekermus v. Nardy
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Alfred M. Lama, J.
Petitioners Leo Bekermus and Nedato, Inc., seek a judgment pursuant to CPLR article 78 annulling and setting aside the determination by the respondent Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Southampton which denied the petitioners’ application for a special exception permit to convert an existing restaurant and motel units into residential condominium dwelling units. Petitioners contend that the action by the respondents was illegal, unconstitutional, arbitrary, capricious, discriminatory, an abuse of *379discretion, affected by error of law and not supported…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Marcus v. Village of MamaroneckNew York Court of Appeals · 1940
- B & G Constr. Corp. v. Bd. of Appeals of the Vill. of AmityvilleNew York Court of Appeals · 1955
- Robitzek Investing Co. v. Colonial Beacon Oil Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1943
- Reichenbach v. Windward at SouthamptonNew York Supreme Court · 1975
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- DeNicola v. ScarpelliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989