Legal Opinion

Seumenicht v. Zoning Board

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

Decided July 17, 1995PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Rye, dated June 10, 1993, which denied the petitioner’s application for an area variance, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Murphy, J.), entered December 14, 1993, which granted the petition, annulled the determination, and granted the petitioner a variance.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits.

The petitioner, Karl H. Seumenicht, had a deck…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Fuhst v. FoleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
  2. Conley v. Town of Brookhaven Zoning Board of AppealsNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
  3. Bienstock v. Zoning Board of AppealsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  4. Slakoff v. HitchcockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Bari Homes, Inc. v. Zoning Board of AppealsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  2. Vimplex Corp. v. ChinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API