Eminent Domain Law

Condemned Property Should Be Valued As Assemblage

Matter of Village of Port Chester

NYLJ 4/13/10, p. 29, col. 1

Supreme Ct., Westchester Cty.

(LaCava, J.)

In an eminent domain proceeding, condemnor and condemnees differed significantly about how to value the condemned property. The court agreed with condemnees that the property should be valued as an assemblage.

Condemnee Bologna has owned two of the subject parcels since the 1970s. In 1993, condemnee Didden bought several of the other subject parcels, allegedly in an oral partnership with Bologna. The corporations of which Didden was the president bought still other parcels. Subsequently, the parties sought to interest a commercial entity in developing the subject parcels together. By February 2004, they obtained final site plan approval for construction of a CVS pharmacy on the combined sites. Three months earlier, however, the Village of Port Chester commenced condemnation proceedings with respect to the parcels after the village had unsuccessfully attempted to persuade the owners to permit a favored developer to develop the parcel. In the condemnation proceedings, the village contended that each of the parcels should be valued separately; the condemnees argued that the parcels should be valued as an assemblage.

In concluding that the parcels should be valued as an assemblage, the court emphasized that a partnership need not be in writing, that the parcels were contiguous, and that the partners had persistently tried to develop the parcels as a unit. Under these circumstances, the court concluded that the highest and best use of the parcels was as an assemblage, and concluded that valuation should be based on the value of the parcels if assembled.

Condemned Property Should Be Valued As Assemblage

Matter of Village of Port Chester

NYLJ 4/13/10, p. 29, col. 1

Supreme Ct., Westchester Cty.

(LaCava, J.)

In an eminent domain proceeding, condemnor and condemnees differed significantly about how to value the condemned property. The court agreed with condemnees that the property should be valued as an assemblage.

Condemnee Bologna has owned two of the subject parcels since the 1970s. In 1993, condemnee Didden bought several of the other subject parcels, allegedly in an oral partnership with Bologna. The corporations of which Didden was the president bought still other parcels. Subsequently, the parties sought to interest a commercial entity in developing the subject parcels together. By February 2004, they obtained final site plan approval for construction of a CVS pharmacy on the combined sites. Three months earlier, however, the Village of Port Chester commenced condemnation proceedings with respect to the parcels after the village had unsuccessfully attempted to persuade the owners to permit a favored developer to develop the parcel. In the condemnation proceedings, the village contended that each of the parcels should be valued separately; the condemnees argued that the parcels should be valued as an assemblage.

In concluding that the parcels should be valued as an assemblage, the court emphasized that a partnership need not be in writing, that the parcels were contiguous, and that the partners had persistently tried to develop the parcels as a unit. Under these circumstances, the court concluded that the highest and best use of the parcels was as an assemblage, and concluded that valuation should be based on the value of the parcels if assembled.