City of Buffalo v. Frontier Industrial & Marine Supply Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

City of Buffalo v. Frontier Industrial & Marine Supply Corp.

30 A.D.2d 636, 290 N.Y.S.2d 382, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4001

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 16, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 30 A.D.2d 636 (City of Buffalo v. Frontier Industrial & Marine Supply Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Buffalo v. Frontier Industrial & Marine Supply Corp., 30 A.D.2d 636, 290 N.Y.S.2d 382, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4001 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, without costs. Memorandum: The reproduction cost less depreciation testimony given by the defendant’s expert and adopted by the court was unsupported by any expert engineering evidence, and the same was true of the replacement cost analysis of the plaintiffs’ expert. The testimony that was given as to the cost of construction varied between $180,000 and almost $400,000 and no doubt is explained by the lack of any supporting evidence. No adequate evidentiary basis relating to building costs and comparable land sales is provided in the record on which an award may properly be made. All concur, except Williams, P. J., and Goldman, J., who dissent and vote to affirm. (Appeal from judgment of Erie Trial Term, in condemnation proceeding.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Del Vecchio and Marsh, JJ.

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

Judgment reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, without costs. Memorandum: The reproduction cost less depreciation testimony given by the defendant’s expert and adopted by the court was unsupported by any expert engineering evidence, and the same was true of the replacement cost analysis of the plaintiffs’ expert. The testimony that was given as to the cost of construction varied between $180,000 and almost $400,000 and no doubt is explained by the lack of any supporting evidence. No adequate evidentiary basis relating to building costs and comparable land sales is provided in the record on which an award may properly be made. All concur, except Williams, P. J., and Goldman, J., who dissent and vote to affirm. (Appeal from judgment of Erie Trial Term, in condemnation proceeding.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Del Vecchio and Marsh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.2d 636, 290 N.Y.S.2d 382, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4001, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-buffalo-v-frontier-industrial-marine-supply-corp-nyappdiv-1968.