Ebert v. New York State Office of Parks, Recreation & Historic Preservation

119 A.D.2d 62 (1986)

From our private database of 46,400+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Ebert v. New York State Office of Parks, Recreation & Historic Preservation

New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
119 A.D.2d 62 (1986)

  • Written by Jody Stuart, JD

Facts

In 1982, the trustees of Cornell University submitted a proposal for the demolition of Stone Hall to enable the construction of a new facility. Stone Hall, a building owned by the state, was located on a state-college campus. The proposal was approved by the state. In 1984, Stone Hall was listed on the state and national historical preservation registers, and the City of Ithaca Landmark Preservation Commission (commission) subsequently designated Stone Hall as a local landmark. Pursuant to a City of Ithaca historical-preservation ordinance, a local landmark could not be demolished without a permit issued by the commission. The State University Construction Fund (fund) (defendant) refused to comply with the local-permit requirement, asserting that the proposed demolition was exempt from regulation by the commission. The City of Ithaca (plaintiff) commenced an action in special-term court for an injunction based on the permit requirement. The special-term court held that the fund was required to obtain a permit from the commission before Stone Hall could be demolished and granted injunctive relief. The fund appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Casey, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 829,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 829,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 829,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,400 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership