McMinn v. Town of Oyster Bay
New York Court of Appeals
66 N.Y.2d 544, 498 N.Y.S.2d 128, 488 N.E.2d 1240 (1985)
- Written by Tanya Munson, JD
Facts
In 1973, Robert and Joan McMinn (plaintiffs) purchased a house in Massapequa in the Town of Oyster Bay (the town) (defendant). In 1976, the McMinns leased their house to four unrelated men between the ages of 22 and 25. After the tenants moved in, a criminal action was filed against the McMinns in the district court because the house was occupied by more than one family. The McMinn’s house was in a residential district that only permitted single-family housing. The town zoning ordinance restricted single-family housing to any number of persons that were related by blood, marriage, or adoption or to two unrelated people over the age of 62. Through this ordinance, the town sought to preserve the character of traditional single-family neighborhoods, reduce parking and traffic problems, control population density, and prevent noise and other disturbances. The McMinns brought suit in the trial court, seeking a declaration that the portion of the town ordinance restricting occupancy of single-family homes was in violation of the due-process and equal-protection clauses of the state constitution. The trial court concluded that the town ordinance’s age and marital-status requirement for defining two unrelated individuals violated the state constitution, but that it was otherwise valid. The McMinns appealed. The appellate court held that the challenged portion of the ordinance was facially unconstitutional under the due-process clause of the state constitution.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Simons, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.