Legal Opinion
Piliero v. Hitchcock
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided January 30, 1995Published
1Opinion of the Court
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of East Hampton, dated November 12, 1991, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioners’ application for area and width variances,'the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Berler, J.), entered August 13, 1992, which dismissed the proceeding.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Upon review of the record, we agree with the Supreme Court’s conclusion that the appellants failed to establish either that the original owner and developer of the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Ellington Construction Corp. v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Inc. Village of New HempsteadNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Doyle v. AmsterNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- Ramapo 287 Ltd. Partnership v. Village of MontebelloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Showers v. Town of Poestenkill Zoning Board of AppealsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Munnelly v. Town of East HamptonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991