Beh v. State

56 N.Y.2d 576
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedMarch 30, 1982
DocketClaim No. 60990
StatusPublished

This text of 56 N.Y.2d 576 (Beh v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Beh v. State, 56 N.Y.2d 576 (N.Y. 1982).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division, insofar as appealed from, reversed, with costs, and the judgment of the Court of Claims should be reinstated, for the reasons stated in the dissenting memorandum at the Appellate Division.

The trial court “by necessary implication from its award of consequential damages” found the loss of direct access rendered the property unsuitable for its highest and best use (Priestly v State of New York, 23 NY2d 152, 155).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur; Judge Jasen dissents and votes to affirm for reasons stated in the memorandum of the Appellate Division (81 AD2d 744).

Order, insofar as appealed from, reversed, with costs, and the judgment of the Court of Claims reinstated in a memorandum.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Priestly v. State of New York
242 N.E.2d 827 (New York Court of Appeals, 1968)
Beh v. State
81 A.D.2d 744 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
56 N.Y.2d 576, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beh-v-state-ny-1982.