People v. Skidmore

CourtNew York Villiage Court
Citation329 N.Y.S.2d 881,69 Misc.2d 320
Decision Date29 December 1971
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of New York v. Deborah SKIDMORE and Doreen McClellan, Defendants.

Page 881

329 N.Y.S.2d 881
69 Misc.2d 320
The PEOPLE of the State of New York
v.
Deborah SKIDMORE and Doreen McClellan, Defendants.
Village Justice Court of Sea Cliff, Nassau County.
Dec. 29, 1971.

Richard Allen Siegel, Mineola, of counsel, for the People.

Rosemary S. Page, New York City, for defendants.

JOHN L. SKINNER, Village Justice.

This is a prosecution brought by the Village of Sea Cliff for a violation of the Village Zoning Ordinance, Article II, Sec. 2b and Article V, sec. e & h. The Village charges that the defendants constitute two families and occupy a dwelling known as 28 Marden Avenue in violation of the ordinance which permits only one family

Page 882

occupancy. The defendants do not claim that the occupancy is a non-conforming use.

The ordinance in question is dated June 6, 1955 (Article II, 2b) and that provides:

'In a residence district, except as [69 Misc.2d 321] otherwise provided no dwelling shall hereafter be erected, and no dwelling shall be changed, altered, remodeled or converted for use by more than one (1) family. A one (1) family dwelling within the meaning of this section shall be defined as a detached building designed for or occupied exclusively by one (1) family.'

A further amendment to the Village Zoning Ordinance Article V, e & h dated April 19, 1960 makes the following definition:

(e) 'A 'family' is one or more persons occupying a dwelling unit as a non-profit housekeeping unit. More than five persons, exclusive of issue and domestic servants, not related by blood, marriage or adoption, shall not be considered to constitute one family.'

(h) A 'dwelling unit' is a building or entirely self-contained portion thereof containing complete housekeeping facilities for only one family, including any domestic servants employed on the premises and having no enclosed space (other than vestibules, entrance of other hallways or porches) or cooking or sanitary facilities in common with any other 'dwelling unit'. A boarding house, convalescent home, dormitory, fraternity or sorority house, hotel, inn, lodging house, nursing, or other similar structures shall not be deemed to constitute a dwelling unit.'

It is uncontroverted that the defendants occupy the dwelling with their children, one of the defendants having three children and the other having four children. The seven children range in age from about 5 years to 16 years.

The dwelling is a substantial one on nearly an acre of ground, has six bedrooms, two...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • People v. Kalayjian
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Term
    • December 28, 1973
    ...of Schenectady v. Alumni Association of Union Chapter, Delta Chi Fraternity, Inc., 5 A.D.2d 14, 168 N.Y.S.2d 754; People v. Skidmore, 69 Misc.2d 320, 329 N.Y.S.2d 881; Town of Henrietta v. Fairchild, 53 Misc.2d 862, 279 N.Y.S.2d The judgment should be affirmed. Judgment affirmed. HOGAN, P.J......
  • Parvin v. Parvin
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • March 7, 1972
    ...would be unproductive. Plaintiff claims defendant committed numerous acts of violence against her. She submits an order of protection of [69 Misc.2d 320] the Family Court issued on December 14, 1971. On or about August 25, 1971, the parties executed a separation agreement. All of the forego......
2 cases
  • People v. Kalayjian
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Term
    • December 28, 1973
    ...of Schenectady v. Alumni Association of Union Chapter, Delta Chi Fraternity, Inc., 5 A.D.2d 14, 168 N.Y.S.2d 754; People v. Skidmore, 69 Misc.2d 320, 329 N.Y.S.2d 881; Town of Henrietta v. Fairchild, 53 Misc.2d 862, 279 N.Y.S.2d The judgment should be affirmed. Judgment affirmed. HOGAN, P.J......
  • Parvin v. Parvin
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • March 7, 1972
    ...would be unproductive. Plaintiff claims defendant committed numerous acts of violence against her. She submits an order of protection of [69 Misc.2d 320] the Family Court issued on December 14, 1971. On or about August 25, 1971, the parties executed a separation agreement. All of the forego......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT