From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

De Marco v. Fitzgerald

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 1, 1962
181 N.E.2d 767 (N.Y. 1962)

Opinion

Argued January 11, 1962

Decided March 1, 1962

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, FRANK A. GULOTTA, J.

Jack H. Hantman for appellants.

John E. Kane for respondents.


Order of Appellate Division reversed and that of Special Term reinstated, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division, in the following memorandum: The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and that of Special Term reinstated, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division. The only questions of substance relate to whether the area and setback restrictions in the zoning ordinance were violated. Whether these violations existed depends upon whether the closed garage beneath the open porch requires the porch area to be measured in determining the front-yard setback restriction from Linwood Road and the area restriction requirements. For the reasons stated at Special Term, we are satisfied that this masonry construction under the porch is not to be included. No opinion.

Concur: Judges FULD, FROESSEL, VAN VOORHIS, BURKE and FOSTER. Chief Judge DESMOND and Judge DYE dissent and vote to affirm for the reasons stated in the memorandum opinion of the Appellate Division.


Summaries of

De Marco v. Fitzgerald

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 1, 1962
181 N.E.2d 767 (N.Y. 1962)
Case details for

De Marco v. Fitzgerald

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ANTHONY DE MARCO et al., Appellants, v. JOSEPH E…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 1, 1962

Citations

181 N.E.2d 767 (N.Y. 1962)
181 N.E.2d 767
227 N.Y.S.2d 24

Citing Cases

MATTER OF DE MARCO v. FITZGERALD

Decided April 5, 1962 Appeal from ( 11 N.Y.2d 775) MOTIONS FOR…

Lopes v. Fire Bd. of Appeals

In the court's opinion this determination was erroneous. Zoning regulations being in derogation of the common…