From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Oppenheimer v. Kraus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 1, 1927
221 A.D. 773 (N.Y. App. Div. 1927)

Opinion

June, 1927.

Present — Kelly, P.J., Manning, Kapper, Lazansky and Hagarty, JJ.


Peremptory mandamus order unanimously affirmed, with costs. The resolution in question does not prohibit the maintenance of a lunch room in zone 4, nor does it prohibit the use, for restaurant purposes, of a structure designed in the form of a wagon. The resolution does prohibit, generally, the use, for business purposes, of any structure, no matter of what design, unless it "has a frontage of at least 20 feet and a depth of at least 50 feet and if the structure consists of only a ground floor then and in that event the ceiling must be at least 10 feet in height from the floor and the cornice must be at least 16 feet from the pavement." So, by the terms of the resolution, the respondent is deprived of the right to maintain a lawful business on his property unless the structure in which he intends to maintain it is at least twenty feet in width and at least fifty feet in depth. The effect is, not only to deprive the respondent of a lawful right, but to prohibit every owner of a lot the width of which is less than twenty feet and the depth of which is less than fifty feet, from erecting thereon a structure to be used for business purposes. The resolution is arbitrary and unreasonable. It does not serve a purpose either useful or aesthetic, nor does it in any way promote public health, public morals, public safety, public business, or general prosperity. To enforce it would be to deprive owners of their property without due process of law.

See Zone and Building Code of Village of Floral Park Amdt. Dec. 14, 1926. — [REP.

See U.S. Const. 14th Amendt. § 1; State Const. art. 1, § 6. — [REP.


Summaries of

Matter of Oppenheimer v. Kraus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 1, 1927
221 A.D. 773 (N.Y. App. Div. 1927)
Case details for

Matter of Oppenheimer v. Kraus

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Application of JULIUS OPPENHEIMER, Respondent, for a…

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

Date published: Jun 1, 1927

Citations

221 A.D. 773 (N.Y. App. Div. 1927)

Citing Cases

MATTER OF FLOWER HILL BLDG. CORP. v. Flower Hill

The difference is not substantial. Petitioner further argues that respondent village exceeded its authority…