Matter of WKP, LLC, Oakridge Mfr Holdings, LLC, and RDNW LLC v Town of Lancaster, Town of Lancaster Town Board
Categories
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Municipal land use and rezoning.
In a proceeding under CPLR article 78 [special proceeding used to challenge actions of administrative agencies or public bodies] and a declaratory judgment action, Supreme Court, Erie County, issued an amended order that, among other things, directed a revote on petitioners-plaintiffs' rezoning application.
The Appellate Division reversed the amended order in its entirety on the law and vacated the ordering paragraphs, including the directive requiring a revote.
The court adopted the same reasoning set out in the companion decision, Matter of WKP, LLC v Town of Lancaster (appeal No. 1), and therefore concluded that the amended order could not stand.
Background
The petitioners-plaintiffs brought a CPLR article 78 proceeding and declaratory judgment action arising from the Town of Lancaster's handling of their rezoning application. The amended order on this appeal concerned relief requiring the Town and Town Board to conduct a new vote on that application.
Lower Court Decision
Supreme Court, Erie County (Diane Y. Devlin, J.), entered an amended order on January 23, 2025, that, among other things, directed a revote of the petitioners-plaintiffs' application for rezoning.
Appellate Division Reversal
The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, unanimously reversed the amended order on the law, without costs, and vacated the ordering paragraphs. The court stated that the same memorandum controlling appeal No. 1 governed this appeal as well.
Legal Significance
This decision shows that relief compelling further municipal action on a rezoning application may be undone on appeal when the legal basis for that relief fails under the reasoning applied in a related companion appeal.
The order requiring the Town to hold a new rezoning vote was vacated; the appellate court relied entirely on the rationale stated in the companion appeal.