Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Application of PARKWAY VILLAGE EQUITIES CORPORATION, Petitioner-Appellant, For a Judgment, etc., v. BOARD OF STANDARDS AND APPEALS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent-Respondent, The Bahar Group, LLC, et al., Additional Respondents-Respondents.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered on or about June 19, 2000, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding, brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, to vacate a resolution of respondent Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York dated February 15, 2000, which reversed a determination of additional respondent Department of Buildings of the City of New York revoking building permits issued to additional respondent Bahar Group, LLC, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The authority charged with enforcing New York City Zoning Resolution § 12-10 is respondent Board of Standards and Appeals (BSA), and since the questions raised concerning the application of that Zoning Resolution related to BSA's expertise, the court properly accorded the BSA's interpretation of the relevant subdivisions of Zoning Resolution §§ 12-10 (Zoning Lot, subds. [a], [d] ) “great weight and judicial deference”, such interpretation having been “neither irrational, unreasonable nor inconsistent with the governing statutes” (Matter of Trump-Equitable Fifth Ave. Co. v. Gliedman, 62 N.Y.2d 539, 545, 478 N.Y.S.2d 846, 467 N.E.2d 510; accord, Matter of Toys “R” Us v. Silva, 89 N.Y.2d 411, 418-419, 654 N.Y.S.2d 100, 676 N.E.2d 862).
We have considered petitioner's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: January 11, 2001
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)