From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Romantini v. Village of East Hills

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 18, 1979
70 A.D.2d 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 1979)

Opinion

June 18, 1979


In an action to declare the zoning ordinance of the Village of East Hills unconstitutional as it applies to plaintiff's real property, plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered September 13, 1978, which, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the complaint. Judgment modified, on the law, by deleting therefrom the provision dismissing the complaint, and substituting therefor a provision declaring that the ordinance under review is not unconstitutional or confiscatory as applied to plaintiff's property. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with costs to defendant. Inasmuch as it is improper in a declaratory judgment action to dismiss the complaint, even though the plaintiff is not entitled to the declaration sought (Lanza v Wagner, 11 N.Y.2d 317, 334, app dsmd 371 U.S. 74), we declare that the ordinance is not unconstitutional or confiscatory as applied to plaintiff's property. Plaintiff did not establish that he is precluded by the ordinance from the use of the property for any purpose to which it may be reasonably adapted (see Williams v Town of Oyster Bay, 32 N.Y.2d 78). Mollen, P.J., Hopkins, Rabin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Romantini v. Village of East Hills

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 18, 1979
70 A.D.2d 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 1979)
Case details for

Romantini v. Village of East Hills

Case Details

Full title:JERRY ROMANTINI, Appellant, v. VILLAGE OF EAST HILLS, Respondent

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

Date published: Jun 18, 1979

Citations

70 A.D.2d 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 1979)

Citing Cases

Peekskill Suburbs, Inc. v. Morabito

The proper procedural vehicle by which to attack the constitutionality of a zoning ordinance is a declaratory…