In re Perryman
Opinion of the Court
Order reversed on the law and facts, with fifty dollars costs and disbursements, and the petition dismissed and determination of the board confirmed. Memorandum: The return of the village board contains a sufficient averment of the facts known to its members to sustain the decision of the board denying the petitioner’s application for the permit in question. Under these circumstances the board was not required to call witnesses to establish what it already knew. (People ex rel. Fordham M. R. Church v. Walsh, 244 N. Y. 280.) We find nothing in the record to indicate that the village board acted arbitrarily, capriciously, unreasonably or that it in any way discriminated
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.