In re New York & Brooklyn Bridge

New York Supreme Court

In re New York & Brooklyn Bridge

4 N.Y.S. 222, 1888 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1105

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 10, 1888

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 4 N.Y.S. 222 (In re New York & Brooklyn Bridge) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re New York & Brooklyn Bridge, 4 N.Y.S. 222, 1888 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1105 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1888).

Pincite

Opinion

Brown, J.

This appeal is taken from an award of commissioners appointed to ascertain and appraise the compensation to be made by the trustees of the New York & Brooklyn Bridge, to persons interested in the real estate described in the petition. The appellants were tenants in the possession of the real estate under a lease, the unexpired term of which, at the date of the report, was about two years. There was, as is usual in all cases of this character, wide differences of opinion among the witnesses as to the value of the appellants’ interest in the land, but the proof fully justifies the award. None of the exceptions taken to the rulings of the commission upon the rejection and acceptance of evidence are well founded. The measure of damages in cases of this character is well settled to be the value of the unexpired term of the lease, less the rent reserved. The tenant is not entitled to be awarded damages caused by the necessity of removal of personal property, nor consequential damages arising from interruption of business. In re Railroad Co., 35 Hun, 307; In re Railroad Co., Id. 633. None of the rulings of the commission conflicted with this rule. We find no error in the case, and the award is affirmed.

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

Brown, J.

This appeal is taken from an award of commissioners appointed to ascertain and appraise the compensation to be made by the trustees of the New York & Brooklyn Bridge, to persons interested in the real estate described in the petition. The appellants were tenants in the possession of the real estate under a lease, the unexpired term of which, at the date of the report, was about two years. There was, as is usual in all cases of this character, wide differences of opinion among the witnesses as to the value of the appellants’ interest in the land, but the proof fully justifies the award. None of the exceptions taken to the rulings of the commission upon the rejection and acceptance of evidence are well founded. The measure of damages in cases of this character is well settled to be the value of the unexpired term of the lease, less the rent reserved. The tenant is not entitled to be awarded damages caused by the necessity of removal of personal property, nor consequential damages arising from interruption of business. In re Railroad Co., 35 Hun, 307; In re Railroad Co., Id. 633. None of the rulings of the commission conflicted with this rule. We find no error in the case, and the award is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 N.Y.S. 222, 1888 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-new-york-brooklyn-bridge-nysupct-1888.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack