In the Matter of Raritan Development Corp. v. Silva

689 N.E.2d 1373 (1997)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In the Matter of Raritan Development Corp. v. Silva

New York Court of Appeals
689 N.E.2d 1373 (1997)

Facts

Zoning provisions for a planned development permitted a floor-area ratio of 0.5 per building, limiting the total floor area to 50 percent of the area of the lot on which the building was located. The provisions defined the floor area as the sum of the areas of all the floors of a building, including any floor space used for dwelling purposes, no matter the location. The provisions, however, excluded from the floor-area calculation any cellar space, defined as space situated more than halfway below ground-level. Based on these provisions, the architect of a planned three-story building in the development excluded from his floor-area ratio calculations the ground-floor space on the basis that it constituted a cellar. Thereafter, the New York City Department of Buildings (the department) opposed the calculations, contending that the ground-level space should have been included in the floor area because it was a dwelling area, despite its status as a cellar under the provisions. After finding that the cellar exclusion applied only to cellar space used for non-dwelling purposes, the department revoked the building permit from the Raritan Development Corporation (plaintiff). Raritan appealed to the Board of Standards and Appeals (the board), which concluded that the department’s decision was reasonable and based upon the appropriate consideration of added population and parking burdens on the neighborhood.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Smith, J.)

Dissent (Levine, 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 748,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 748,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 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 748,000 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
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 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