Legal Opinion

Brechner v. Incorporated Village of Lake Success

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 16, 1960PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBernard S. Meyer, J.

Plaintiffs, owners of residences within the defendant village, seek an injunction and a declaration that certain amendments of the Village Zoning Ordinance are invalid because (1) not adopted in accordance with statutory procedures, (2) they were not part of a comprehensive plan, but rather constitute “ spot ” zoning, (3) they result from a contract or understanding with the property owner, (4) the standards set forth are so vague as to be unconstitutional. After the opening of the trial, it was continued to permit the owner of property redistricted by one of the amendments to be brought in…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Rodgers v. Village of TarrytownNew York Court of Appeals · 1951
  2. Marcus v. Village of MamaroneckNew York Court of Appeals · 1940
  3. Hall v. LeonardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940
  4. Village of Mill Neck v. NolanNew York Court of Appeals · 1932
  5. Village of Lynbrook v. CadooNew York Court of Appeals · 1929

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Brechner v. INC. VIL. OF LAKE SUCCESSSupreme Court of Florida · 1960
  2. Thomas v. Town of BedfordNew York Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Ponemon v. Inc. Village of East HillsNew York Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Opn. No., New York Attorney General Reports1980

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

Powered by the Exa API