You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Holy Family Ukrainian Catholic Church v. O'Connell

Citations: 270 A.D.2d 265; 704 N.Y.S.2d 852; 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2516

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; March 5, 2000; New York; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In a CPLR article 78 proceeding, the petitioner sought to review the Planning Board of the Town of Islip's determination from August 11, 1998, which denied site plan approval. The Supreme Court, Suffolk County, upheld this denial in a judgment entered on March 9, 1999, dismissing the petition. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, noting that the Planning Board provided valid reasons for its decision, including concerns about insufficient on-site parking and the potential negative impact on surrounding properties. These reasons were deemed to be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The decision included concurrence from Justices Ritter, Altman, Krausman, and McGinity. Costs were awarded against the petitioner.

Legal Issues Addressed

Awarding of Costs in Judicial Proceedings

Application: The appellate court awarded costs against the petitioner following the dismissal of the petition.

Reasoning: Costs were awarded against the petitioner.

Review of Administrative Decisions under CPLR Article 78

Application: The court reviews the decision of an administrative agency, such as a Planning Board, to determine if the decision was arbitrary and capricious or supported by substantial evidence.

Reasoning: The appellate court affirmed the judgment, noting that the Planning Board provided valid reasons for its decision, including concerns about insufficient on-site parking and the potential negative impact on surrounding properties.

Substantial Evidence Standard

Application: The court found that the Planning Board's denial of site plan approval was supported by substantial evidence, thereby upholding the Board's decision.

Reasoning: These reasons were deemed to be supported by substantial evidence in the record.