Opinion · Nylaw New York
MATTER OF LEONE v. YATES, 280 App. Div. 823 (1952)
In the Matter of JOSEPH J. LEONE et al., Appellants, against ROBERT YATES etal., Constituting the Bd. of Appeals of the Inc. Vill. ofElmsford, Westchester County, et al., Respondents.JOSEPH J. LEONE et al., Appellants, v. PETER CARMECI, Respondent., 280 A.D. 823 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. 1952)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Nylaw New York
- Jurisdiction
- Nylaw
- Date
- 1952-06-23
- Topic
- general
MATTER OF LEONE v. YATES, 280 App. Div. 823 (1952) In the Matter of JOSEPH J. LEONE et al., Appellants, against ROBERT YATES etal., Constituting the Board of Appeals of the Incorporated Village ofElmsford, Westchester County, et al., Respondents.JOSEPH J. LEONE et al., Appellants, v.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed MATTER OF LEONE v. YATES, 280 App. Div. 823 (1952). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
MATTER OF LEONE v. YATES,280 App. Div. 823(1952)
In the Matter of JOSEPH J. LEONE et al., Appellants, against ROBERT YATES et
al., Constituting the Board of Appeals of the Incorporated Village of
Elmsford, Westchester County, et al., Respondents.
JOSEPH J. LEONE et al., Appellants, v. PETER CARMECI, Respondent.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.
Consolidated appeals in a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act and in a companion action. The proceeding, to review a determination of the board of appeals of the incorporated village of Elmsford granting a variance as to the rear yards of three proposed dwelling houses, was instituted by the owners of a dwelling located generally to the rear of the proposed houses. The action is by the petitioners in the proceeding against the applicant for the variances to enjoin him from constructing the proposed dwellings. In the proceeding the appeals are by the petitioners from an order dismissing the proceeding and from an order denying their motion to add the defendant in the action as a party to the proceeding and for an injunctionpendente lite.The appeal in the action is from an order denying plaintiffs' motion for an injunctionpendentelite.Orders unanimously affirmed, with a single bill of $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion.
Present — Nolan, P.J., Carswell, Johnston, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ.