Evans v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Evans v. State

29 A.D.2d 611, 285 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2642

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

DecidedDecember 29, 1967

DocketClaim No. 40983

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 29 A.D.2d 611 (Evans 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

Evans v. State, 29 A.D.2d 611, 285 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2642 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Reynolds, J.

Appeal and cross appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims awarding claimant $56,000, and interest, for the appropriation of 279.7 acres of land located in Saratoga County pursuant to then section 13 of the Conservation Law (now § 1-0503). The experts for both the claimant and the State while far apart on value agreed on the division of the property involved into three distinct parcels; a commercial strip along Route 50, an inland area suited for residential purposes and the bottom land, on which there existed a divergence as to use. The trial court, although recognizing this differentiation, made no attempt to delineate and evaluate specific areas and instead found an average value of $200 per acre for the entire plot. Both litigants are in agreement as to the error of this approach, presumably, because each feels a proper breakdown will enhance their respective positions. This, of course, clearly highlights the necessity for a delineation and valuation of the unequal areas here involved in order to permit us to make an adequate and intelligent judicial review of the case (Conklin v. State of New York, 22 A D 2d 481). The Trial Judge having died during the pendency of this appeal, a new trial will be required unless the parties stipulate that a new decision upon the record previously made may be rendered by another Judge (Judiciary Law, § 21). Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and a new trial ordered, unless the parties shall, within 10 days, stipulate to submit the record previously made to a Judge to be designated by the Presiding Judge of the Court of Claims to render a new decision complying with the guidelines of this decision, in which event, and upon the reaching of this new decision, the case will be restored to the calendar. Gibson,

[612]*612P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by Reynolds, J.

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

Reynolds, J.

Appeal and cross appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims awarding claimant $56,000, and interest, for the appropriation of 279.7 acres of land located in Saratoga County pursuant to then section 13 of the Conservation Law (now § 1-0503). The experts for both the claimant and the State while far apart on value agreed on the division of the property involved into three distinct parcels; a commercial strip along Route 50, an inland area suited for residential purposes and the bottom land, on which there existed a divergence as to use. The trial court, although recognizing this differentiation, made no attempt to delineate and evaluate specific areas and instead found an average value of $200 per acre for the entire plot. Both litigants are in agreement as to the error of this approach, presumably, because each feels a proper breakdown will enhance their respective positions. This, of course, clearly highlights the necessity for a delineation and valuation of the unequal areas here involved in order to permit us to make an adequate and intelligent judicial review of the case (Conklin v. State of New York, 22 A D 2d 481). The Trial Judge having died during the pendency of this appeal, a new trial will be required unless the parties stipulate that a new decision upon the record previously made may be rendered by another Judge (Judiciary Law, § 21). Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and a new trial ordered, unless the parties shall, within 10 days, stipulate to submit the record previously made to a Judge to be designated by the Presiding Judge of the Court of Claims to render a new decision complying with the guidelines of this decision, in which event, and upon the reaching of this new decision, the case will be restored to the calendar. Gibson,

[612]*612P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by Reynolds, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.2d 611, 285 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2642, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/evans-v-state-nyappdiv-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack