Case Name: In the Matter of the Application of Rose A. Dillon, Appellant, for a Certiorari Directed to James O'Shaughnessy, President, and Others, etc., Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1927-12
Citations: 222 A.D. 772
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Application of Rose A. Dillon, Appellant, for a Certiorari Directed to James O’Shaughnessy, President, and Others, etc., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 222
Pages: 772–773

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Application of Rose A. Dillon, Appellant, for a Certiorari Directed to James O’Shaughnessy, President, and Others, etc., Respondents.

Opinion:
Final order dismissing certiorari proceeding unanimously affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. The petitioner has mistaken her remedy. If the present classification under the present ordinance is unreasonable, discriminatory or confiscatory, it would seem that her proper course should be to apply for a permit to erect the desired apartment house, and, in the event of its denial, to seek by mandamus its issuance, attacking the present classification as unreasonable. (Matter of Isenbarth v. Bartnett, 237 N. Y. 617.) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Young, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ.