From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Edwards v. City of Watertown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 1, 1936
247 App. Div. 860 (N.Y. App. Div. 1936)

Opinion

March, 1936.

Present — Taylor, Edgcomb, Thompson, Crosby and Lewis, JJ.


Judgment modified by striking therefrom paragraphs designated as 4, 5, 6 and 7 and as so modified affirmed, with costs to the respondents. Memorandum: We rest our decision upon the single ground that the building permit issued on November 9, 1934, followed by the performance, prior to November 26, 1934, of a substantial amount of work under a contract entered into by the plaintiff Frank H. Edwards for the construction of foundations and pits incidental to the proposed erection of a gasoline station, vested in the plaintiffs such rights as could not be divested either by the attempted revocation of such permit by the city engineer, or by the change in the permissible use of plaintiffs' property by the amendment to the zoning ordinance adopted November 26, 1934. ( People ex rel. Ortenberg v. Bales, 224 App. Div. 87; affd., 250 N.Y. 598 .) All concur. (The judgment declares plaintiffs' right to construct a gasoline station.)


Summaries of

Edwards v. City of Watertown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 1, 1936
247 App. Div. 860 (N.Y. App. Div. 1936)
Case details for

Edwards v. City of Watertown

Case Details

Full title:FRANK H. EDWARDS and ROSE E. EDWARDS, Respondents, v. THE CITY OF…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Mar 1, 1936

Citations

247 App. Div. 860 (N.Y. App. Div. 1936)

Citing Cases

Town of Wheatland v. Esso Standard Oil Co.

( City of Buffalo v. Chadeayne, 134 N.Y. 163, supra; Rice v. Van Vranken, 132 Misc. 82, affd. 225 App. Div.…

ABM Builders, Inc. v. Gribetz

The defendants claim that they are bound by such order, and by virtue of same, the invalidation of…