Levine v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Levine v. State

24 A.D.2d 524, 260 N.Y.S.2d 226, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4000

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

DecidedJune 7, 1965

DocketClaim No. 39708

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.2d 524 (Levine 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

Levine v. State, 24 A.D.2d 524, 260 N.Y.S.2d 226, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4000 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In this appropriation ease involving improved farm property, there was no proof of market value and hence no legal basis for the award. The claimant’s expert proceeded, as did the State’s, to testify to the market value of the land, as though it were unimproved, to which he added the reproduction costs, less depreciation, of the buildings, treating the sum of these items as the value of the property. (See Matter of Huie [Fletcher], 2 N Y 2d 168, 173.) As in Guthmuller v. State of New York (23 A D 2d 597), where the same situation obtained, a new trial is necessary, in the interests of justice. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts and in the interests of justice, without costs, and a new trial ordered. Gibson, P. J„ Herlihy, Reynolds, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

In this appropriation ease involving improved farm property, there was no proof of market value and hence no legal basis for the award. The claimant’s expert proceeded, as did the State’s, to testify to the market value of the land, as though it were unimproved, to which he added the reproduction costs, less depreciation, of the buildings, treating the sum of these items as the value of the property. (See Matter of Huie [Fletcher], 2 N Y 2d 168, 173.) As in Guthmuller v. State of New York (23 A D 2d 597), where the same situation obtained, a new trial is necessary, in the interests of justice. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts and in the interests of justice, without costs, and a new trial ordered. Gibson, P. J„ Herlihy, Reynolds, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 524, 260 N.Y.S.2d 226, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4000, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levine-v-state-nyappdiv-1965.