Case Name: In the Matter of Helga I. Bausch, by Andreas Bausch, Appellant, v. John M. Minsker et al., Constituting the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of East Aurora, Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1993-10-01
Citations: 197 A.D.2d 837
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Helga I. Bausch, by Andreas Bausch, Appellant, v John M. Minsker et al., Constituting the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of East Aurora, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 197
Pages: 837–837

Head Matter:
Fourth Department,
October, 1993
(October 1, 1993)
In the Matter of Helga I. Bausch, by Andreas Bausch, Appellant, v John M. Minsker et al., Constituting the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of East Aurora, Respondents.
[602 NYS2d 248]

Opinion:
—Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly dismissed petitioner's CPLR article 78 proceeding, which sought to annul respondents' determination denying petitioner's application for a use variance. Petitioner failed to establish that no reasonable return could be achieved under a permitted use of the property and thus failed to meet the requisite showing of unnecessary hardship (Matter of Village Bd. v Jarrold, 53 NY2d 254, 257; Matter of Otto v Steinhilber, 282 NY 71, 76). The bare conclusory testimony of witnesses that the property could not yield a reasonable return was insufficient to justify the grant of a use variance (Matter of Village Bd. v Jarrold, supra, at 259). We conclude that respondents' determination was supported by substantial evidence. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Whelan, J.—Article 78.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.