Megin Realty Corp. v. Town of Ramapo, 46 N.Y.2d 891 (1979)

r
r

To establish confiscatory zoning, a challenger must prove the land will yield no reasonable return if used for any permitted purpose under the existing zoning ordinance.

r
r

Summary

r

Megin Realty Corp. challenged the zoning classification of its land, arguing it was unlawful and seeking a zone change to commercial highway. The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division’s reversal of the Supreme Court’s decision, holding that Megin Realty failed to demonstrate that the existing “planned industrial” zoning was confiscatory or discriminatory. The court emphasized that to prove confiscatory zoning, a landowner must show the property cannot yield a reasonable return for any permitted use under the ordinance, a burden Megin Realty failed to meet. The court also rejected the discrimination claim, finding that merely showing a neighboring parcel received a zoning change does not entitle other parcels to the same change.

r
r

Facts

r

In 1972, Megin Realty Corp. purchased two parcels of land zoned