Reynolds v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Reynolds v. State

25 A.D.2d 466, 266 N.Y.S.2d 167, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5186

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

DecidedJanuary 13, 1966

DocketClaim No. 41773

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 25 A.D.2d 466 (Reynolds 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

Reynolds v. State, 25 A.D.2d 466, 266 N.Y.S.2d 167, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5186 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Aulisi, J.

Appeal by the State from a judgment of the Court of Claims awarding damages in the amount of $6,500 with interest for the permanent appropriation of a portion of claimant’s property for highway purposes. A triangular-shaped section was appropriated by taking a rear corner containing approximately 12% of claimant’s well-landscaped, 210 feet by 330 feet lot upon which were situated a large house and a three-car garage. The trial court found direct damages of $3,560 and consequential damages of $2,940. The State contends that valuations by claimant’s expert and the court are inconsistent with the highest and best use which is commercial and that the appropriation enhanced the value of the premises. The record before us does not compel such a conclusion and in our opinion the finding of consequential damages should be sustained. However, the highest appraisal of direct damages was supplied by claimant’s expert who testified to $2,699. [467]*467The court awarded $3,560 which has no basis in the record and therefore cannot stand (Matter of City of New York [A. & W. Realty Corp.], 1 N Y 2d 428, 432-433). Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by reducing the award of direct damages to $2,700 and the total award to $5,640 and interest, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs.

Gibson, P. J., Ilerlihy, Reynolds and Hamm, JJ., concur.

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

Aulisi, J.

Appeal by the State from a judgment of the Court of Claims awarding damages in the amount of $6,500 with interest for the permanent appropriation of a portion of claimant’s property for highway purposes. A triangular-shaped section was appropriated by taking a rear corner containing approximately 12% of claimant’s well-landscaped, 210 feet by 330 feet lot upon which were situated a large house and a three-car garage. The trial court found direct damages of $3,560 and consequential damages of $2,940. The State contends that valuations by claimant’s expert and the court are inconsistent with the highest and best use which is commercial and that the appropriation enhanced the value of the premises. The record before us does not compel such a conclusion and in our opinion the finding of consequential damages should be sustained. However, the highest appraisal of direct damages was supplied by claimant’s expert who testified to $2,699. [467]*467The court awarded $3,560 which has no basis in the record and therefore cannot stand (Matter of City of New York [A. & W. Realty Corp.], 1 N Y 2d 428, 432-433). Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by reducing the award of direct damages to $2,700 and the total award to $5,640 and interest, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs.

Gibson, P. J., Ilerlihy, Reynolds and Hamm, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 466, 266 N.Y.S.2d 167, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5186, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reynolds-v-state-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack