Immick Co. v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Immick Co. v. State

251 A.D. 919, 297 N.Y.S. 623

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

DecidedJuly 2, 1937

DocketClaim No. 23293

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 251 A.D. 919 (Immick Co. 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

Immick Co. v. State, 251 A.D. 919, 297 N.Y.S. 623 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims, entered in the clerk’s office of that court on the 25th day of November, 1936, in favor of the claimant and against the State of New York for the sum of $20,223.85. The only question raised on this appeal is the proper measure of damages for the loss of use of claimant’s highway construction machinery and equipment which was caused to remain idle by the delay of the respondent in obtaining the requisite rights-of-way. The number of days that each piece of equipment was out of use because of such delay was conceded on the trial below. The claimant showed the reasonable rental value per day of such equipment. The State offered no testimony to contradict the figures given by the claimant’s experts as to rental value. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Hill, P. J., Rhodes, McNamee, Crapser and Bliss, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims, entered in the clerk’s office of that court on the 25th day of November, 1936, in favor of the claimant and against the State of New York for the sum of $20,223.85. The only question raised on this appeal is the proper measure of damages for the loss of use of claimant’s highway construction machinery and equipment which was caused to remain idle by the delay of the respondent in obtaining the requisite rights-of-way. The number of days that each piece of equipment was out of use because of such delay was conceded on the trial below. The claimant showed the reasonable rental value per day of such equipment. The State offered no testimony to contradict the figures given by the claimant’s experts as to rental value. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Hill, P. J., Rhodes, McNamee, Crapser and Bliss, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D. 919, 297 N.Y.S. 623, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/immick-co-v-state-nyappdiv-1937.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack