CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Louchheim v. Zoning Board of Appeals

Petitioners appealed a judgment from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, which had denied their CPLR article 78 petition. The petition aimed to review a determination by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southampton, dated October 20, 2005. The ZBA's determination had granted NL Housing, LLC, a variance for the enlargement of two structures that served as a labor camp for migrant workers, benefiting from a preexisting nonconforming use. The petitioners argued that this variance violated Southampton Code § 330-167 (B) (1) (a), also known as the 50% rule, which limits nonconforming use expansion to 50% of the floor area as measured from when the use first became nonconforming in 1957. The Appellate Court reversed the Supreme Court's judgment, granted the petition, annulled the ZBA's determination, and denied the application for the variance, finding that the ZBA had incorrectly interpreted the zoning ordinance.

ZoningVarianceNonconforming UseMigrant HousingZoning Board of AppealsCPLR Article 78Appellate ReviewStatutory Interpretation50% RuleSuffolk County
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Frangella Mushroom Farms, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals

The petitioner, who operates a mushroom growing farm in the Town of Coeymans, sought a special use permit to construct an apartment building for its migrant laborers. The Zoning Board of Appeals denied the application, citing concerns related to aesthetic harmony, property values, safety, and traffic. However, the court found the Board's 17 specific findings to be arbitrary and capricious, lacking sufficient evidence in the record. The court determined that the proposed housing would not adversely affect the district and would replace existing substandard dwellings without increasing population or traffic. Consequently, the court annulled the Board's determination and mandated the issuance of the special use permit.

Zoning OrdinanceSpecial Use PermitArbitrary and CapriciousLand Use PlanningMigrant HousingAgricultural OperationsJudicial ReviewCPLR Article 78Town of CoeymansAlbany County
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Genesis of Mount Vernon, N.Y., Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals

This case concerns a hybrid proceeding where the petitioner, Genesis project, challenged the denial of building and area variances by the Mt. Vernon Zoning Board of Appeals for a proposed congregate housing facility for the elderly. The petitioner also sought a declaratory judgment that the City of Mt. Vernon Zoning Ordinance's definitions of 'boarding house' and 'family' were unconstitutional. The court found both definitions to be unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, violating the State Due Process Clause. Consequently, the court granted declaratory relief, allowing the petitioner to construct the facility as a two-family house and also granted the area variances, remanding to the Zoning Board for setting reasonable conditions. A claim for damages and attorney's fees was severed for a separate action.

Zoning OrdinanceDue ProcessConstitutional LawDeclaratory JudgmentUse VarianceArea VarianceBoarding HouseFamily DefinitionElderly HousingNot-for-Profit
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Real Estate Board of New York, Inc. v. City of New York

The New York Appellate Division found that the City of New York fully complied with environmental laws (SEQRA and CEQR) when issuing a negative declaration for a proposed zoning amendment in the Garment Center. The amendment aimed to preserve industrial loft space from conversion to office space. The court determined that the Department of City Planning and Department of Environmental Protection had thoroughly reviewed potential environmental impacts and reasonably concluded that the zoning change would not have significant effects requiring an Environmental Impact Statement. Consequently, the court reversed the Supreme Court's judgment that had mandated an EIS and dismissed the consolidated action.

Zoning AmendmentEnvironmental ReviewSEQRACEQRNegative DeclarationGarment CenterLand UseAppellate DecisionUrban PreservationEconomic Impact
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Taylor v. Foley

The petitioners initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge the Greenburgh Zoning Board of Appeals' (the board) determination that a drug abuse counseling center was a permitted use for Daytop Village Foundation, Inc. The Supreme Court, Westchester County, annulled the board's decision and remitted the matter for a de novo hearing. Daytop and the board members appealed this decision. The appellate court reversed the Supreme Court's order and judgment, confirmed the board's original determination, and dismissed the proceeding on the merits. The court found the board's interpretation of the zoning ordinance, which permitted 'professional office uses,' to be rational and supported by substantial evidence, noting that Daytop's facility was licensed and staffed by professionals.

Zoning OrdinanceProfessional Office UseDrug Abuse Counseling CenterPermitted UseTown of GreenburghZoning Board of AppealsAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationSubstantial EvidenceLand Use
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 13, 1976

Committee for the Betterment of Mount Kisco v. Taylor

This case involves a CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a zoning board's determination regarding a building permit. The Supreme Court, Westchester County, initially dismissed the petition, a decision that was subsequently affirmed on appeal. The core issue concerned a proposed group home designed to house 10 children and staff within a single-family residential district. The court determined that the group home qualified as a "family" for zoning purposes, citing the precedent set in City of White Plains v Ferraioli which emphasizes internal structure and external appearance akin to a traditional family unit. The decision also distinguished Village of Belle Terre v Boraas, asserting that the group home aligns with the neighborhood's character rather than conflicting with it.

CPLR Article 78Zoning LawGroup HomeSingle-Family Residential DistrictBuilding PermitSocial Services LawDefinition of FamilyMunicipal AuthorityNeighborhood CharacterWestchester County
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cornell University v. Bagnardi

The New York Court of Appeals addressed two consolidated cases involving local zoning regulations and educational institutions' expansion plans. The court held that the presumption of public benefit from educational uses can be rebutted by evidence of a net negative impact on public health, safety, and welfare. Municipalities may impose reasonable special permit conditions to mitigate adverse effects, but cannot require institutions to prove a "need" for expansion, as this criterion is outside the scope of police power. Consequently, the denials of applications by Cornell University and Sarah Lawrence College, which were based on impermissible "need" criteria, were deemed improper. Both cases were remitted to their respective zoning boards for reconsideration under the clarified legal standards.

Zoning RegulationsEducational InstitutionsSpecial PermitsLand UsePolice PowerPublic WelfareHardshipVarianceMootnessRemittal
References
18
Case No. ADJ7212870, ADJ7212871
Regular
Jul 08, 2013

VICTOR MEJIA vs. AUTO ZONE, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of a prior decision concerning Victor Mejia and Auto Zone. The Board rescinded the Administrative Law Judge's (WCJ) decision and returned the case for further proceedings. This order is not a final decision on the merits. The WCJ will issue a new decision after further review.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardVictor MejiaAuto Zone Inc.ADJ7212870ADJ7212871Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Administrative Law JudgeGrant ReconsiderationRescind DecisionFurther Proceedings
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Halperin v. City of New Rochelle

This case concerns a hybrid proceeding challenging determinations made by the Board of Appeals on Zoning of the City of New Rochelle. Petitioners sought review of decisions related to parking and area variances for a house of worship, the approval of a final environmental impact statement, and the alleged overreach of the City Council in enacting a zoning ordinance. The court confirmed the Zoning Board's determinations, finding them rational and not arbitrary or capricious. The petition was denied, and the proceeding dismissed on the merits, as the court affirmed the Zoning Board's proper application of zoning criteria and adherence to environmental review under SEQRA.

Zoning LawArea VariancesParking VariancesEnvironmental ReviewSEQRACPLR Article 78Declaratory JudgmentArbitrary and Capricious StandardRational Basis ReviewLand Use Agencies
References
69
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 31, 1999

Concerned Citizens of Valley Stream, Inc. v. Bond

The petitioners appealed a Supreme Court judgment that denied their petition to review a determination by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Incorporated Village of Valley Stream. The Board had conditionally granted Nathan Serota's application for site plan approval. Petitioners contended that this decision violated the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). The court affirmed the judgment, concluding that the Board had complied with SEQRA's substantive and procedural requirements by identifying environmental concerns, taking a "hard look" at them, and providing a "reasoned elaboration" for its determination, specifically addressing issues like flooding, drainage, and increased traffic.

CPLR Article 78SEQRASite Plan ApprovalZoning Board of AppealsEnvironmental ReviewNassau CountyJudicial ReviewArbitrary and CapriciousAbuse of DiscretionEnvironmental Impact Statement
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 81 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational