Search for: "ASIAN AMS. v. Koch"
Results 1 - 6
of 6
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jun 2014, 3:39 pm
This Criminal Court has long recognized the considerable authority of municipalities to implement zoning plans and programs to meet the increasing encroachments of urbanization on the quality of their residents' lives as held in similar cases of Asian Ams. for Equality v Koch and Matter of Harbison v City of Buffalo. [read post]
3 Apr 2021, 10:30 am
Inside the Koch-Backed Effort to Block the Largest Election-Reform Bill in Half a Century via @NewYorkerBrian Galle: Pleased to have been able to help draft this amicus brief on behalf of non-profit scholars in AFPF v. [read post]
8 Dec 2022, 9:39 am
The respondents/defendants further demonstrated, prima facie, that the zoning amendments are in accordance with a well-considered comprehensive plan, and fall within the bounds of the zoning power delegated to the City by statute (see Asian Ams. for Equality v Koch, 72 NY2d at 121; Matter of JDM Holdings, LLC v Village of Warwick, 200 AD3d 880; Hogue v Village of Dering Harbor, 199 AD3d 904). [read post]
22 Dec 2013, 2:53 pm
"A town's zoning determination is entitled to a strong presumption of validity; therefore, one who challenges such a determination bears a heavy burden of demonstrating, 'beyond a reasonable doubt, that the determination was arbitrary and unreasonable or otherwise unlawful'" (Matter of Bergami v Town Bd. of the Town of Rotterdam, 97 AD3d 1018, 1019 [2012], quoting Matter of Rotterdam Ventures, Inc. v Town Bd. of the Town of Rotterdam, 90 AD3d 1360, 1361-1362 [2011]; see… [read post]
12 Apr 2018, 1:17 pm
In our view, Local Law No. 3 was consistent with the Village’s comprehensive plan and was “calculated to benefit the community as a whole as opposed to benefitting individuals or a group of individuals” (Asian Ams. for Equality v Koch, 72 NY2d at 131; see Daniels v Van Voris, 241 AD2d 796, 798 [1997]). [read post]
12 Apr 2018, 1:17 pm
In our view, Local Law No. 3 was consistent with the Village’s comprehensive plan and was “calculated to benefit the community as a whole as opposed to benefitting individuals or a group of individuals” (Asian Ams. for Equality v Koch, 72 NY2d at 131; see Daniels v Van Voris, 241 AD2d 796, 798 [1997]). [read post]
