Case Name: The People of the State of New York ex rel. Rosie Gross and Others, Respondents, v. William E. Walsh and Others, Constituting the Board of Appeals of the City of New York, Appellants. Daniel Fuchs and Another, Intervenors, Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1925-04
Citations: 213 A.D. 878
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York ex rel. Rosie Gross and Others, Respondents, v. William E. Walsh and Others, Constituting the Board of Appeals of the City of New York, Appellants. Daniel Fuchs and Another, Intervenors, Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 213
Pages: 878–878

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York ex rel. Rosie Gross and Others, Respondents, v. William E. Walsh and Others, Constituting the Board of Appeals of the City of New York, Appellants. Daniel Fuchs and Another, Intervenors, Appellants.

Opinion:
Final order reversed upon the law and the facts. While this proceeding appears to have been properly brought under article 5, section 20, of the Zoning Law (People ex rel. Smith v. Walsh, 211 App. Div. 205; affd., by the Court of Appeals, 240 N. Y. 606; People ex rel. Small v. Walsh, 212 App. Div. 883), we are not satisfied from the record before us that practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships have been shown sufficently to justify the order of the board of appeals. We, therefore, remit the proceeding to the Special Term to take testimony and determine the question as to whether practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships existed justifying the variance under section 20. Kelly, P. J., Manning, Kelby, Young and Kapper, JJ., concur.
See New York Building Zone Resolution of 1916, art. 5, § 20, as amd.; now New York Building Zone Resolution of 1924, art. 5, § 21; Cosby's Code of Ordinances [Anno. 1924], pp. 636, 637; Cosby's Code of Ordinances [Anno. 1925], p. 651.— [Rep.