Narrative Opinion Summary
In a CPLR article 78 proceeding, the New York State Freshwater Wetlands Appeals Board's determination, dated May 12, 1993, to dismiss the petitioners' challenge to the designation of certain property as freshwater wetlands was upheld. The dismissal was based on the petitioners' lack of standing under ECL 24-1104. The Supreme Court of Richmond County, presided by Justice Amann, ruled on December 10, 1993, that a contract vendee does not qualify as a landowner under the statute, thus lacking standing to appeal. The court found the respondents' determination to be rational, reasonable, and not arbitrary or capricious. The judgment was affirmed with costs, and all justices concurred in the decision.
Legal Issues Addressed
Affirmation of Judgment with Costssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The judgment was affirmed with costs, reflecting the court's agreement with the respondents' decision.
Reasoning: The judgment was affirmed with costs, and all justices concurred in the decision.
Rationality and Reasonableness of Administrative Determinationssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court affirmed the respondents' determination as rational and reasonable, indicating it was not arbitrary or capricious.
Reasoning: The court found the respondents' determination to be rational, reasonable, and not arbitrary or capricious.
Standing under ECL 24-1104subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: In this case, the court determined that the petitioners lacked standing under ECL 24-1104 because a contract vendee does not qualify as a landowner.
Reasoning: The Supreme Court of Richmond County, presided by Justice Amann, ruled on December 10, 1993, that a contract vendee does not qualify as a landowner under the statute, thus lacking standing to appeal.