Home/New York Court of Appeals/Matter of Rochester Urban Renewal Agency

Matter of Rochester Urban Renewal Agency

397 N.E.2d 749, 48 N.Y.2d 694, 422 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 2356
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedOctober 16, 1979
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 397 N.E.2d 749 (Matter of Rochester Urban Renewal Agency) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Matter of Rochester Urban Renewal Agency, 397 N.E.2d 749, 48 N.Y.2d 694, 422 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 2356 (N.Y. 1979).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with *696 costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division.

Claimant has created an issue as to value and the extent of its damages by alleging that the property taken by eminent domain was a specialty and therefore was not susceptible of valuation by fair market standards. Since fair market value is presumptively the .correct method for assessing damages in condemnation cases, a condemnee who would have the court apply a different method must bear the burden of demonstrating that the value , of his property cannot reasonably be measured by the fair market value approach (Matter of Penn Yan Urban Renewal Agency v Penn Yan Realty Corp., 57 Misc 2d 1033; see Matter of Rochester Urban Renewal Agency [Patchen Post], 45 NY2d 1, 9; Newburgh Urban Renewal Agency v Williams, 79 Misc 2d 991; cf. Heyert v Orange & Rockland Utilities, 17 NY2d 352, 364). Claimant here has failed to sustain this burden, and, consequently, its request for a higher damages award must be rejected.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

Related

In re the Acquisition of Real Property of Broome
133 A.D.2d 984 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)
In re the City of New York
449 N.E.2d 1246 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
Niagara Falls Urban Renewal Agency v. Gorge Terminal Realty Co.
92 A.D.2d 719 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
397 N.E.2d 749, 48 N.Y.2d 694, 422 N.Y.S.2d 59, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 2356, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-rochester-urban-renewal-agency-ny-1979.