This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Parrillo (D) operated a restaurant prior to 1955. The Town enacted a new zoning ordinance which did not allow D to operate, but because D existed prior to the new zoning, D qualified as a pre-existing nonconforming use. In 1978, D made renovations to his establishment that turned it into a disco. D applied for a disco license with the Town (P) but was denied. D continued business as usual, and a municipal court fined D $250. On a trial, de novo D was found guilty again. The Appellate Division reversed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.