HomeMy WebLinkAboutChallenging an Unfavorable Decision by ZBA; Letter from Lusher & Peirez.pdfzv /Y
t51636
?tn
C
81, LaDonua M. Lusher nnd David H. peircz
If yrru ever ftnd your"self on the unfavorable side of a decisien by a locai
roning board of appeals (zBA), you rnay want to fatniliarlze yourself with tle law kncw,n
as ftn Article 78 proceecling' This speclol proceedi'g is pr:irr:arily us*d to clrallenge tle
nctivitics oiif an adrniilistrative ag$rrcy in court, If is the kay proceduml device used to
seek reiief fro*r an arlverse rlecision by a loeal zoning lroarcl of appeals, a boarci of
tralstees, totvtr council, or the adrrrinistr:ation in charge 0{. a local lire clepartment. one
advantage is that it provides faster relief fbr its petitioner than a taelitional court action.
H$lvever, it is irxpl:rta.nt to unclerstand the unique rcquirements of commencing a'
Article 78 proceeding, in paflicular, a very short Sfat'te of Limitations.
An A;ticle 78 prnceeding begins by filing n petition fo:.rclief in rhe
Surpr.eme Cowt'iin anY county lvithin the judieial district where tire proceeding is
triahle''ol Accordingly, the petition must be filed in any countyll,ithin the jurticial clistrict
rvhere tbe ZBhfir6cle the dete.rurination complained af, or wi:ere the adminietrative
proceedings were {rrought.s
The petition can challenge fl:e ZBA's riecision on four grounds only,
whsther the adrninistratit'e body CIr offioer: 1) failed to perform a duty i*iposod r,uon it
by r*w;2) is ptoceeding cr absut to ploceecl rvithout or in *xcess ofjur:isdietion; 3) made
the'cieteutrination in rriolation of lawful procudure, afTec.ted by a,n eryo," of.law, ar,:rrl was
' cpLR g 5o{:(a).- cl,LR rs 506(b).
I 5 1636
arbitrary and eapricjous or an abuse of discretion; or 4) made thc detennination at a
hearring at whieh evi:denee was t*ke$, and is, on the entire record, supp<rrteel by
substantial evidence.:r No sther issues rnay he raired.
Althouglr it was prerniously recuired that a petitioner file a notice of petition
and petitior: togethrl'itt order to cornmence an Arlicle 78 proceec{ing, CPLR. 304 was
raaofitl! amencled, anetr now alk:rovs an Article 78 proceeding to cornnrefrce by filing t5e
petition axone,a Additionally, because an Ar:ticle 78 proceeding lequires that a date lie se1
for a hearin& oft tlre petition, tlie petitioner mcst aiso f,rle a Reqnest for Juclicial
Intervention (RJI) if- a j*dge is not yet iuvoXrreel in the case, lilhis efiaSles a judge to be
eorrsultecl for appr'tlval o'f the returrr date, whieh must be ineludect in tlie notice of uetitiCIn.
ancl'served on the respondents erlong wiflr the petition after it is filed.5
The statute of ljmitations in most Article 78 proceeclings is four-months.
I-l'oweveln when the pe.titioner seeks fo challengo the clecision of a ZBA, the stafute of
linritations begins lvhen the decisioa of tire ZBA, or the rnilutes of 1fte board
'reeting
whieh eontain the decision and t'esolu{ion of the board, are filecl with the Vl'llage (Tor.r,n
rtr City) Clerk. Moreover. a petition challenging a ZBA'sdecision must be file4 r,r,ithin
thirty days (as opposed to the usual fiour-nronth statute of li.r'rritations period).6 T5e
ZBA't decision ol minutes rnrlst rcfr.ecteach hsaid rnember's vote, and clemonstrnte that
the board acted fonually as a trody when votjng.
I 5 I636
CIncs the petition is filed with {he court, it rnust be son ed on all advera.e
pnffies ffi ra'ell as'rhernunicipality, along r,l,ith a notice of petition or orrrer to sholv cause.
and nny supporting affidavits specified in the *otice, at least twent'r elays before fhc tjrue
at which the petition is noticed ta be heard.", The petitioner's papers n:nst tre,served cin
the responclent(-s) in the sams ma'Her as fl surnillons,s anci proof,of such se*,iqe nrust be
filed witlliu lilteen days of r.r,hen the sfatute of lirnitations expiles.e
'rhe petition must be verified an<l may be acconrpanied by af.fidavits or
other written proof,l0 ancl m,st specify the time and prace for. a hearir:g on tho petitio*.
lt lrns beeu helcl that ths filing ancl service <lf a uotice of petitio' lacking a retuna clate is
'iurisdictionally defeetiv*,ll and subject to elisrnissal,12 Indeecl, ihe petitioner should at the
or":tset ir:cludq as cxhib,itg to fhe petition a,r reJevant anct rnateriar qrocunre*ts whicl: were
before the tnuni*ipal boc{y in connection with t}re zoning applicatioa which support
peti.tionei;,s claittls,
The respondent municipality rnust file a verified enswer: along u,it5 the
"Ret*tn"' the tratrscript of the rscorcl of the p:-'eeeclings ancl all clocu':rents put 5efiore t,e
tsoard'ti Aclclitiein atrly, thepetitioner rnust serve a repry in response to any ..rlew mfftfer,.
raised in the a'tswDl or if any ne'w allegations of fact appear in fhe answ'r, or if the
petiti*ner l'is'hes to challengs the accuracy of the proeeedings cnuexecl to the ans'ver, 14
A.D.zd 758, 7j6 N.y.S.2d 47g (jd Depr. 2002),
d 714,6$0 N.il,Zcl 57S (tg|l).
t5t636
snse the pleadings have been filed anc{ se,rvecl, an oral argulnent is uuually
]reld where fhe court hears the parties'contentions, The coufi then eithe' af.r.nns the
zHA's clecision' lever$es it, or remands it back to the Board for furtlier proceeclings.
I{olevet' If the peiltioner's challenge to the zEA'selecisioil is essentially based upon its
as$s'ttion that it was not suppodecl lry substantial evidencro the court, after ruling or fhe
other issues raiserl in the case, must hansfer fie case to the appellate division wlriclr hes
s.ole julisdictianto rletermirre rvhetheror not tlrere wng *ubstar:tial e'iderce.r5
contesting an:administrative agencyos decision by filir.rg an Artiele T&
proceeding is procedurally challenging. llvery practitioner sh'uld meticulously r.eview
tlre n:les rvhieh surronnd Ar{icle 78 proceectrings, be farniliar with all of its nuances. and
literally, "cr-o$s all the T,s ancJ rlot all the 1,s,,.
" crLR rs ?tio4(g).