Ebersol v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ebersol v. State

25 A.D.2d 482, 266 N.Y.S.2d 539, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5213

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

DecidedJanuary 13, 1966

DocketClaim No. 41845

StatusPublished

This text of 25 A.D.2d 482 (Ebersol v. State) 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

Ebersol v. State, 25 A.D.2d 482, 266 N.Y.S.2d 539, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5213 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, without costs of these appeals to any party. Memorandum: The Court of Claims having properly found that claimants still have suitable albeit circuitous access to the new highway, erred in allowing damages based upon relocation of the highway (Northern Lights Shopping Center v. State of New York, 20 A D 2d 415, affd. 15 N Y 2d 688). The allowance of $3,490 for damage to building lots is based upon unsatisfactory evidence (Anania v. State of New York, 17 A D 2d 904) because there is no clear foundation or factual support for the opinion valuation (Katz v. State of New York, 10 A D 2d 164, 166). (Appeal and cross appeal from judgment of Court of Claims for claimants on a claim for permanent appropriation of realty.)

Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Henry and Del Vecchio, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, without costs of these appeals to any party. Memorandum: The Court of Claims having properly found that claimants still have suitable albeit circuitous access to the new highway, erred in allowing damages based upon relocation of the highway (Northern Lights Shopping Center v. State of New York, 20 A D 2d 415, affd. 15 N Y 2d 688). The allowance of $3,490 for damage to building lots is based upon unsatisfactory evidence (Anania v. State of New York, 17 A D 2d 904) because there is no clear foundation or factual support for the opinion valuation (Katz v. State of New York, 10 A D 2d 164, 166). (Appeal and cross appeal from judgment of Court of Claims for claimants on a claim for permanent appropriation of realty.)

Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Henry and Del Vecchio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 482, 266 N.Y.S.2d 539, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ebersol-v-state-nyappdiv-1966.