|
6-23 PROCEDURES § 6.0 3 [ 5 1
<br />v. Pastan, I Mass. App. 28, 29�4 N-E-2d 51011 (19,73); Sea View Cliffs, Inc. v. Zoning
<br />Bd, of Review, 112, R.I. 314, 309 A.2d 20 (1973); Everson Elec., Co. v. Zoning Bid. of
<br />Adjustment, 395 Pa. 168, 1 A.21d, 63 (19 9); In rel Appeal of Bid. of Supervisors, 49
<br />Pa. Commw. 267, 412 A.2d 1613 (1980).
<br />- 116 Nicholson v. Zoning Bid. of Adjustment, 392 Pa. 278, 140 A.2d 604 (1958);
<br />Cart le r v. City of Nashua, 113 N'. 40 7,11 31081 A.2d 8 4 07 (19 -13), -, Lugar v. B u rn sv 1 le,
<br />295 N.W.2d 6109. (Minn. 1980).
<br />117'
<br />To n of Warren v. Froist, 115 R.I. 51 3.50 A.2d 608 (1976); Appeal of
<br />Farrell v,., Desautels, Inc., 135 Vt. 6114, 383 A.2d 6,1 9 (1978); Conmar Builders, Inc.
<br />v. Board OT Zoning Appeals, 43 Misc. 2d 577, 251 N.Y.S.2d '021 (1964),
<br />11'9 Pearson, v. Shoernaker' 25 Mise, 2,d 5919 2012 N.Y'.S.2d 7 7 9 (1960); Taft v.
<br />Zoning, Bid., of R,eviewv, 716, R.I. 443, 71 A.2d 8816, (1915101).
<br />119 Rochester Historical Socil v. Crowiley, 14 A-D-2d 490, 217 1 .Y.S.2d 619
<br />(1961); Appeal of Farrell v. Desautels,11"Inciiiii, 135 Vt. 614, 383, A,. 2d 619 (19"178).
<br />120See supra note 114.,
<br />121 Wentworth Hotel, Inc. v. New Casitle, l 1 N. H. 2,1, 28171 A.2d 610' (1972);
<br />National ]Black Child Dev. Inst. v. District of Columbia Bd. of Zoning Adjustment,,
<br />4813, A.2d 687 (D.C. Cit., App. 1984) , (invalidating condition applied to specific
<br />corporation); St. tinge v. Donovan, '011 N'.,Y.S.2d 700 (App. Div. 19871).
<br />122
<br />Eversoin Elecl,- Col. v. Zoning Bid. of Adjustment, 391.5 Pa. 168, 149 A.2d 63
<br />(1959); Niicholsonv-, Zoning B,d., of'A,djustment, 39 2 Pa. 278, 1,40 A.2d 604 (19558);
<br />Wentworth Hiot,,ell., Inc. v. New Castle, 112 N'.H. 21, 2871 A- 2d 615) (1972).
<br />(Release #4, 3/90E
<br />
|