Legal Opinion

Glundal v. White

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 9, 1972Published

1Opinion of the CourtMarshall E. Livingston, J.

This proceeding seeks a finding that the respondents, as a matter of law, erred in determining that petitioners do not come within the purview of 1 ‘ photographic studios ”, as set forth in section 2.130 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Auburn, New York.

Mr. Grlundal is customarily employed by an advertising agency or his customer directly to prepare negatives for use in making up their ads for magazines and all types of advertising media. He actually photographs a picture of the object or product the advertiser or customer wishes to use for promotional purposes and supplies the color…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. L. F. Letts & Son, Inc. v. City of CortlandNew York Supreme Court · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API