D'Agostino Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Vecchio
Cases that cite this one
13 later published cases cite this decision.
- Soundview Associates v. Town of Riverhead (District Court, E.D. New York 2010)
- CP Vestal LLC v. Town of Vestal (New York Supreme Court, Broome County 2025)
- CP Vestal LLC v. Town of Vestal, N.Y. (New York Supreme Court, Broome County 2025)
- Matter of Jeter v. Poole (N.Y. 2024)
- Matter of Calverton Manor, LLC v. Town of Riverhead (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
- Matter of Calverton Manor, LLC v. Town of Riverhead (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
- Krause v. Piccozzi (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Krause v. Piccozzi (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Golden Horizon Terryville Corp. v. Prusinowski (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- Hamptons, LLC v. Rickenbach (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- Hamptons, LLC v. Rickenbach (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- BBJ Associates, LLC v. Zoning Board of Appeals (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
- Mamaroneck Beach & Yacht Club, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is denied, the determination is confirmed, the hybrid proceeding and action is dismissed on the merits, and it is declared that a transfer station is not a “junkyard” within the meaning of Town of Smithtown Code § 322-3.
Subsequent to the judgment dated August 5, 2003, which granted the petition and directed the Town Board of the Town of Smithtown (hereinafter the Board) to issue to the petitioner a special exception permit for the construction and operation of a construction and demolition debris transfer station, the relevant provisions of the Town of Smithtown Code were amended. The Town of Smithtown Code § 322-3 now effectively prohibits transfer stations in the zoning district in which the petitioner’s property is located. Since, as a general rule, the law as it exists at the time a decision is rendered on appeal is controlling (see Matter of Alscot Inv. Corp. v Incorporated Vil. of Rockville Ctr., 64 NY2d 921, 922 [1985]; Matter of Demisay, Inc. v Petito, 31 NY2d 896 [1972]; Matter of Buffolino v Board of Zoning & Appeals of Inc. Vil. of Westbury, 230 AD2d 794 [1996]), the Board is precluded from granting the petitioner a special exception permit. Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, there are no special facts in this case that would warrant an exception to the general rule (see Matter of Semerjian v Vahradian, 186 AD2d 202 [1992]; cf. Matter of Pokoik v Silsdorf, 40 NY2d 769, 772-773 [1976]). Therefore, the judgment must be reversed, the determination denying the special exception permit confirmed, and the hybrid proceeding and action dismissed.
We note that since this is, in part, a declaratory judgment action, the judgment must contain a declaration that a transfer station is not a “junkyard” within the meaning of Town of Smithtown Code § 322-3 (see Lanza v Wagner, 11 NY2d 317, 334 [1962], appeal dismissed 371 US 74 [1962], cert denied 371 US 901 [1962]). Santucci, J.P., Schmidt, Adams and Skelos, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.