green
Positive treatment
5.3 score
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Matter of Friends of the Shawangunks v. Town of Gardiner Planning Bd.
Group LLC , 197 AD3d 1404, 1406 [3d Dept 2021] [internal quotation marks, ellipsis and citations omitted]; see Matter of Lavender v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of the Town of Bolton , 141 AD3d 970, 972 [3d Dept 2016], appeal dismissed 28 NY3d 1051 [2016], lv denied 29 NY3d 907 [2017]).
discussed
Cited "see"
Sullivan v. Board of Zoning Appeals of Albany
This appeal by respondents ensued. 2 As a general proposition, “a zoning board’s interpretation of a zoning law [or local ordinance] is afforded great deference and will only be disturbed if it is irrational or unreasonable” (Matter of Meier v Village of Champlain Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 129 AD3d 1364, 1365 [2015] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Matter of Lavender v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of the Town of Bolton, 141 AD3d 970, 972 [2016], appeal dismissed — NY3d —, 2016 NY Slip Op 91613 [Nov. 17, 2016]; Matter of Fruchter v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of the Town of Hurley…
discussed
Cited "see"
Sullivan v. Board of Zoning Appeals of Albany
This appeal by respondents ensued. 2 As a general proposition, “a zoning board’s interpretation of a zoning law [or local ordinance] is afforded great deference and will only be disturbed if it is irrational or unreasonable” (Matter of Meier v Village of Champlain Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 129 AD3d 1364, 1365 [2015] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Matter of Lavender v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of the Town of Bolton, 141 AD3d 970, 972 [2016], appeal dismissed — NY3d —, 2016 NY Slip Op 91613 [Nov. 17, 2016]; Matter of Fruchter v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of the Town of Hurley…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of John A. Lavender, II
v.
Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Bolton
v.
Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Bolton
New York Court of Appeals.
Nov 17, 2016.
Cited by 2 opinions | Published
Appeal, insofar as taken from that part of the Appellate Division order affirming the June 2013 Supreme Court judgment, dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that no substantial constitutional question is directly involved; appeal otherwise dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that the remaining portion of the Appellate Division order does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.