From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Palmer v. Furman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 11, 1954
283 App. Div. 664 (N.Y. App. Div. 1954)

Opinion

January 11, 1954.

Present — Nolan, P.J., Wenzel, MacCrate, Schmidt and Beldock, JJ.


Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment dismissing the complaint on the merits in an action for a judgment declaring a zoning ordinance of the Town of Islip, as amended, to be unconstitutional and void as to plaintiffs' property and for injunctive relief. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. The amendment to the ordinance, of which appellants complain, changed the zone wherein appellants' unimproved property is located from a Residence "B" zone to a Residence "A" zone, more highly restricted as to area and related requirements. In our opinion the amendment was not arbitrary or unreasonable. (Cf. Rodgers v. Village of Tarrytown, 302 N.Y. 115.) That there has resulted any depreciation in the value of appellants' property is questionable, but in any event the pecuniary profits of the individual are secondary to the public welfare. ( Shepard v. Village of Skaneateles, 300 N.Y. 115.)


Summaries of

Palmer v. Furman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 11, 1954
283 App. Div. 664 (N.Y. App. Div. 1954)
Case details for

Palmer v. Furman

Case Details

Full title:ELWELL PALMER, Individually and as Executor and Trustee under the Will of…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 11, 1954

Citations

283 App. Div. 664 (N.Y. App. Div. 1954)

Citing Cases

Plymouth Builders, Inc. v. Village of Lindenhurst

While it may have even greater value under an unrestricted business use, that fact alone is not sufficient to…

New York State Commission Against Discrimination v. Pelham Hall Apartments, Inc.

(Cf. Matter of Wulfsohn v. Burden, supra; Palmer v. Furman, 283 App. Div.…