Matteson v. County of Herkimer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matteson v. County of Herkimer

94 A.D.2d 950, 464 N.Y.S.2d 75, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18425

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

DecidedMay 25, 1983

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 94 A.D.2d 950 (Matteson v. County of Herkimer) 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

Matteson v. County of Herkimer, 94 A.D.2d 950, 464 N.Y.S.2d 75, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18425 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

. Application unanimously denied and petition dismissed, without costs. Memorandum: We agree with respondent that the proposed taking is de minimis (EDPL 206, subd [D]). The county plans to straighten and flatten a strip of road less than one-half mile long. The total taking involves only 1.94 acres of petitioners’ 79.5 acres of land. The land to be taken includes only narrow strips abutting the present roadway, as well as one small triangular piece which is a rock outcropping. The taking will not interfere with current land use and does not require the removal of any structures. Under all the circumstances presented, we confirm the condemnor’s finding that it is exempt from the public hearing requirement. (EDPL 207.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Schnepp, JJ.

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

. Application unanimously denied and petition dismissed, without costs. Memorandum: We agree with respondent that the proposed taking is de minimis (EDPL 206, subd [D]). The county plans to straighten and flatten a strip of road less than one-half mile long. The total taking involves only 1.94 acres of petitioners’ 79.5 acres of land. The land to be taken includes only narrow strips abutting the present roadway, as well as one small triangular piece which is a rock outcropping. The taking will not interfere with current land use and does not require the removal of any structures. Under all the circumstances presented, we confirm the condemnor’s finding that it is exempt from the public hearing requirement. (EDPL 207.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Schnepp, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 A.D.2d 950, 464 N.Y.S.2d 75, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matteson-v-county-of-herkimer-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack