Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
State Entitled to Consider Increase in Value of Retained Land
Lerner-Pavlik Realty v. State of New York
NYLJ 8/10/12, p. 26, col. 2
AppDiv, Second Dept.
(memorandum opinion).
In landowner's action to recover damages for a partial taking of real property, both the landowner and the state appealed from a Court of Claims judgment awarding landowner $148,000 in consequential damages. The Appellate Division reversed and remanded, holding that the Court of Claims had improperly failed to consider the state's claim that an increase in the value of landowner's remaining property more than offset any consequential damages landowner suffered.
The state appropriated 4.5 acres of landowner's 36.1 acres in order to build a highway that would improve access to Stewart Airport. Landowner brought this action to recover damages for the land taken. The parties stipulated that landowner was entitled to $230,500 in direct damages for the land taken in fee. The remaining issue was whether landowner suffered consequential or indirect damages as a result of the taking. The Court of Claims awarded $148,000 in consequential damages, an amount within the range of the testimony and appraisal reports prepared by the various experts. The Court of Claims, however, did not address the state's claim that construction of the new highway increased the value of landowner's remaining land, which had frontage on that new highway, increasing potential traffic and eliminating the need to build an access road.
The Appellate Division reversed, and held that the Court of Claims should have considered the benefits to landowner's property generated by the taking and the construction of the new roadway. The court held that those benefits could not be used to offset landowner's direct damages, but could be used to offset the amount of consequential damages. As a result, the court remanded for a consideration of those potential benefits.
State Entitled to Consider Increase in Value of Retained Land
Lerner-Pavlik Realty v. State of
NYLJ 8/10/12, p. 26, col. 2
AppDiv, Second Dept.
(memorandum opinion).
In landowner's action to recover damages for a partial taking of real property, both the landowner and the state appealed from a Court of Claims judgment awarding landowner $148,000 in consequential damages. The Appellate Division reversed and remanded, holding that the Court of Claims had improperly failed to consider the state's claim that an increase in the value of landowner's remaining property more than offset any consequential damages landowner suffered.
The state appropriated 4.5 acres of landowner's 36.1 acres in order to build a highway that would improve access to Stewart Airport. Landowner brought this action to recover damages for the land taken. The parties stipulated that landowner was entitled to $230,500 in direct damages for the land taken in fee. The remaining issue was whether landowner suffered consequential or indirect damages as a result of the taking. The Court of Claims awarded $148,000 in consequential damages, an amount within the range of the testimony and appraisal reports prepared by the various experts. The Court of Claims, however, did not address the state's claim that construction of the new highway increased the value of landowner's remaining land, which had frontage on that new highway, increasing potential traffic and eliminating the need to build an access road.
The Appellate Division reversed, and held that the Court of Claims should have considered the benefits to landowner's property generated by the taking and the construction of the new roadway. The court held that those benefits could not be used to offset landowner's direct damages, but could be used to offset the amount of consequential damages. As a result, the court remanded for a consideration of those potential benefits.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
As businesses across various industries increasingly adopt blockchain, it will become a critical source of discoverable electronically stored information. The potential benefits of blockchain for e-discovery and data preservation are substantial, making it an area of growing interest and importance.