Administrative

In the Matter of the Application of Rose A. Dillon, Appellant, for a Certiorari Directed to James O'Shaughnessy, President, and Others, etc., Respondents

222 A.D. 772·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1927·NY

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

In the Matter of the Application of Rose A. Dillon, Appellant, for a Certiorari Directed to James O’Shaughnessy, President, and Others, etc., Respondents. [MAJORITY] Final order dismissing certiorari proceeding unanimously affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. The petitioner has mistaken her remedy. If the present classification under the present ordinance is unreasonable, discriminatory or confiscatory, it would seem that her proper course should be to apply for a permit to erect the desired apartment house, and, in the event of its denial, to seek by mandamus its issuance, attacking the present classification as unreasonable. (Matter of Isenbarth v. Bartnett, 237 N. Y. 617.) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Young, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ. See Village of Tuckahoe Building Zone Ordinance of 1923, as amd.— [Rep.