Your search for ‘Silverberg Zalantis LLP’ returned 11 results

The Appellate Division held that a town could prohibit a proposed road over property zoned for commercial and single family use when the road was intended solely to serve a multi-family use on an abutting parcel.

Last week the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals found a RLUIPA violation based upon a denial of a special permit to expand a church.

The New York Court of Appeals has held that a person who can demonstrate greater enjoyment of a natural resource than the general public has standing under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) to challenge an action by a governmental entity which may threaten such a natural resource.

In a decision addressing two separate claims of substantial burden under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reached two different conclusions as to the effects of municipal actions on religious groups.

In a major decision, the New York Court of Appeals put a new gloss on the New York Eminent Domain Procedure Law (EDPL) allowing the condemnation by the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) of the so called "Atlantic Yards" area of Brooklyn to proceed.

In a rebuke to the Appellate Division First Department, the New York Court of Appeals today held that the condemnation of land on the upper west side of Manhattan to benefit Columbia University may go forward.

The Appellate Division held that under certain circumstances a zoning board may consider deceitful conduct by an applicant in reaching a determination to deny an area variance.

An interesting recent case involving competing title claims to lands located in the Town of Huntington on Long Island addresses the issue of whether title conveyed by Native Americans, without the English Crown’s (and later the Federal Government’s) approval, is valid.

The Appellate Division Second Department decided a complex appeal involving cross motions on whether a property owner had sufficiently stated causes of action sounding in violations of constitutional rights under 42 USC 1983 and related causes of action resulting from the denial of a certificate of use.