From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Rudey v. Landmarks Preservation Comm

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 22, 1993
627 N.E.2d 508 (N.Y. 1993)

Opinion

Argued October 6, 1993

Decided November 22, 1993

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, Beverly S. Cohen, J.

O. Peter Sherwood, Corporation Counsel of New York City (Fay Leoussis and Leonard Koerner of counsel), for appellants.

Tenzer, Greenblatt, Fallon Kaplan, New York City (James G. Greilsheimer of counsel), and Berle, Kass Case, New York City (Robert S. Davis of counsel), for John M. Rudey and another, respondents.

Richard I. Wolff, New York City, for 1030 Fifth Avenue Corporation, respondent.

Douglas N. Cogen, New York City, for Municipal Art Society of New York, Inc., amicus curiae.


Order affirmed, with costs. It was arbitrary and capricious in the circumstances presented for the Landmarks Preservation Commission to differentiate between two residents in the same building in setting the timetable for replacement of nonconforming windows in both units.

Concur: Chief Judge KAYE and Judges SIMONS, TITONE, HANCOCK, JR., BELLACOSA and LEVINE. Taking no part: Judge SMITH.


Summaries of

Matter of Rudey v. Landmarks Preservation Comm

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 22, 1993
627 N.E.2d 508 (N.Y. 1993)
Case details for

Matter of Rudey v. Landmarks Preservation Comm

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JOHN M. RUDEY et al., Respondents, v. LANDMARKS…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 22, 1993

Citations

627 N.E.2d 508 (N.Y. 1993)
627 N.E.2d 508
606 N.Y.S.2d 588

Citing Cases

Robles v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Citywide Admin. Servs.

The license applicants to whom petitioner is compared, however, need be similar only in material or…

Rudey v. Brown, Harris, Stevens, Inc.

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Elliott Wilk, J.). Since the complaint in the main action…