Realty Associates, Inc. v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Realty Associates, Inc. v. City of New York

1 A.D.2d 1049, 152 N.Y.S.2d 766, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5187

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

DecidedMay 28, 1956

StatusPublished

This text of 1 A.D.2d 1049 (Realty Associates, Inc. v. City of New York) 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

Realty Associates, Inc. v. City of New York, 1 A.D.2d 1049, 152 N.Y.S.2d 766, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5187 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages accruing by reason of unauthorized dumping by respondent of waste material on appellants’ land, the appeal is from a judgment, entered after trial by the court without a jury, dismissing the supplemental complaint on the merits. Judgment reversed on the law, without costs, and new trial granted for the limited purpose of determining and awarding the amount of damages, if any, sustained by appellants by reason of the fill on the westerly portion of the property. It was properly found that respondent was authorized to fill, as it did, the easterly portion of the property. Respondent, however, had no authority to do so with respect to the westerly portion and any finding inconsistent herewith is reversed. The damages, if any, are to be awarded in accordance with the difference between the value of the westerly portion before and after the fill or by the cost of removal thereof and rejjlacement to original condition, whichever is the lesser in amount. Beldook, Acting P. J., Murphy, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages accruing by reason of unauthorized dumping by respondent of waste material on appellants’ land, the appeal is from a judgment, entered after trial by the court without a jury, dismissing the supplemental complaint on the merits. Judgment reversed on the law, without costs, and new trial granted for the limited purpose of determining and awarding the amount of damages, if any, sustained by appellants by reason of the fill on the westerly portion of the property. It was properly found that respondent was authorized to fill, as it did, the easterly portion of the property. Respondent, however, had no authority to do so with respect to the westerly portion and any finding inconsistent herewith is reversed. The damages, if any, are to be awarded in accordance with the difference between the value of the westerly portion before and after the fill or by the cost of removal thereof and rejjlacement to original condition, whichever is the lesser in amount. Beldook, Acting P. J., Murphy, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 A.D.2d 1049, 152 N.Y.S.2d 766, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/realty-associates-inc-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1956.