New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Town Law § 268 (2026)

Enforcement and remedies

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 268. Enforcement and remedies. 1. The town board may provide by
local law or ordinance for the enforcement of this article and of any
local law, ordinance or regulation made thereunder. A violation of this
article or of such local law, ordinance or regulation is hereby declared
to be an offense, punishable by a fine not exceeding three hundred fifty
dollars or imprisonment for a period not to exceed six months, or both
for conviction of a first offense; for conviction of a second offense
both of which were committed within a period of five years, punishable
by a fine not less than three hundred fifty dollars nor more than seven
hundred dollars or imprisonment for a period not to exceed six months,
or both; and, upon conviction for a third or subsequent offense all of
which were committed within a period of five years, punishable by a fine
not less than seven hundred dollars nor more than one thousand dollars
or imprisonment for a period not to exceed six months, or both. However,
for the purpose of conferring jurisdiction upon courts and judicial
officers generally, violations of this article or of such local law,
ordinance or regulation shall be deemed misdemeanors and for such
purpose only all provisions of law relating to misdemeanors shall apply
to such violations. Each week's continued violation shall constitute a
separate additional violation.
  2. In case any building or structure is erected, constructed,
reconstructed, altered, converted or maintained, or any building,
structure or land is used, or any land is divided into lots, blocks, or
sites in violation of this article or of any local law, ordinance or
other regulation made under authority conferred thereby, the proper
local authorities of the town, in addition to other remedies, may
institute any appropriate action or proceedings to prevent such unlawful
erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration, conversion,
maintenance, use or division of land, to restrain, correct or abate such
violation, to prevent the occupancy of said building, structure, or land
or to prevent any illegal act, conduct, business or use in or about such
premises; and upon the failure or refusal of the proper local officer,
board or body of the town to institute any such appropriate action or
proceeding for a period of ten days after written request by a resident
taxpayer of the town so to proceed, any three taxpayers of the town
residing in the district wherein such violation exists, who are jointly
or severally aggrieved by such violation, may institute such appropriate
action or proceeding in like manner as such local officer, board or body
of the town is authorized to do.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 71 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1985–2025 · leading case: Higgins v. Douglas, 304 A.D.2d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Higgins v. Douglas, 304 A.D.2d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003). · cites it 3× “Plaintiffs, the servient landowners, thereafter commenced this action seeking: first, a declaration pursuant to RPAPL article 15 that the Douglas defendants do not benefit from the easement 2 and, in any event, that the easement does not permit the installation of a dock;…”

Marlowe v. Elmwood, Inc., 12 A.D.3d 742 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004). · cites it 6× “In 1992, plaintiffs sent a letter to town officials detailing their contentions that the summer program is an illegal use, requesting pursuant to Town Law § 268 (2) that town officials institute a proceeding to enforce the zoning ordinance.”

Smith v. Town of Mendon, 822 N.E.2d 1214 (NY 2004). · cites it 2× “Second, the Town asserts that the conservation restriction strengthens the available enforcement mechanisms, particularly the ability of the Town to seek injunctive relief.”

Town of Carmel v. Melchner, 105 A.D.3d 82 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). · cites it 3× “The complaint, in effect, contains two causes of action: (1) that the reconfigured docks violate the zoning ordinance in the Town Code, which the Town may enforce by civil action pursuant to Town Law § 268 (hereinafter the first cause of action); and (2) that the reconfigured…”

Zupa v. Paradise Point Ass'n, 22 A.D.3d 843 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005). · cites it 2× “By contrast, the plaintiff James Miller, whose property is located more than one-half mile away from the basin at issue, has no standing under any of the causes of action asserted in the complaint since he failed to establish special damages, is not in close proximity to the…”

Town of North Elba v. Grimditch, 131 A.D.3d 150 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015). · cites it 2× “Although municipal officials indeed are tasked with enforcing zoning ordinances within their boundaries (see Town Law § 268 [2]), this “does not prevent .”

Town of Newfane v. Gen. Star Nat'l Ins., 14 A.D.3d 72 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004). · cites it 2× “The underlying complaint alleges that Callahan was “charged, arrested, and jailed under a warrant” on June 7, 1989 based on his alleged violation of Town Law § 268 and the Town’s zoning ordinance; that the accusatory instrument against Callahan was subsequently amended on…”

Eggert v. LeFever, 222 A.D.2d 1043 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995). · cites it 5× “Based on that refusal, plaintiffs in their first cause of action seek to enjoin defendants from violating the ordinance pursuant to Town Law § 268 (2). Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction to enjoin and restrain defendants from occupying or using LeFever’s land for…”

Goldman v. A&E Club Props., LLC, 89 A.D.3d 681 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). · cites it 2× “The complaint asserted, among other things, causes of action for an injunction pursuant to Town Law § 268 (2) and the common law. The defendants moved, inter alia, to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (4) and, in effect, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (3), or,…”

Manbeck v. Micka, 640 F. Supp. 2d 351 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). “1986) (“In prosecuting violations of a zoning law, Town Law § 268(1) provides that such violations for the purpose of prosecution be classified as misdemeanors.”

Pisello v. Town of Brookhaven, 933 F. Supp. 202 (E.D.N.Y 1996). · cites it 2× “With respect to Pisello’s procedural due process claim, while New York state law permits a court to issue a temporary restraining order to a municipality in order to enforce compliance with its zoning ordinances, there is no prohibition to the occupant’s participation in the…”

Town of Sullivan v. Strauss, 171 A.D.2d 980 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991). · cites it 3× “), entered September 11, 1989 in Madison County, which granted petitioner’s application pursuant to Town Law § 268 (2) to enjoin respondents from operating a commercial hunting enterprise, and (2) from the judgment entered thereon.”

Show all 71 citing cases →

— N.Y. Town Law § 268(1) — 1 case

— N.Y. Town Law § 268(2) — 6 cases

Pisello v. Town of Brookhaven, 933 F. Supp. 202 (E.D.N.Y 1996). “With respect to Pisello’s procedural due process claim, while New York state law permits a court to issue a temporary restraining order to a municipality in order to enforce compliance with its zoning ordinances, there is no prohibition to the occupant’s participation in the…”

Schlossberg v. DeFalco, 2018 NY Slip Op 5348 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018).

DeMunn v. Sheepdog Warrior, LLC (N.D.N.Y. 2020).

Maloney v. Town of Grand Island (W.D.N.Y. 2025).

Town of Warwick v. Black Bear Campgrounds, 2019 NY Slip Op 491 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.