Speach v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Speach v. Smith

47 A.D.2d 713, 364 N.Y.S.2d 257, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8961

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

DecidedFebruary 28, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 47 A.D.2d 713 (Speach v. Smith) 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

Speach v. Smith, 47 A.D.2d 713, 364 N.Y.S.2d 257, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8961 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion granted and reargument scheduled for the April 1975 Term of this court in accordance with the following memorandum: In our decision on this appeal we modified the award of the condemnation commissioners because we held that they had adjusted the market data downward to find a value based upon use of the property as Residential BB-1 and then improperly added to that figure an increment of 30% to reflect the probability that the property would be rezoned from the existing Residential-A classification to Residential RB-1. Upon this motion the property owners contend that we lacked the power to modify the award under the applicable law (L. 1914, ch. 300, as amd.) and that we misinterpreted the evidence and the commissioners’ findings. We hold that the Appellate Division is granted the authority to modify the award by that statute (cf. Matter of Ford [S'isfca], 22 N Y 2d 834; Matter of Ford [Dosseff], 36 A D 2d 352). Upon reargument the parties should confine themselves to the adjusted land value found by the appraisers, the range of evidence and the final land value adopted by the commissioners. Present — -Marsh, P. J., Cardamone, Simons, Mahoney and Witmer, JJ.

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

Motion granted and reargument scheduled for the April 1975 Term of this court in accordance with the following memorandum: In our decision on this appeal we modified the award of the condemnation commissioners because we held that they had adjusted the market data downward to find a value based upon use of the property as Residential BB-1 and then improperly added to that figure an increment of 30% to reflect the probability that the property would be rezoned from the existing Residential-A classification to Residential RB-1. Upon this motion the property owners contend that we lacked the power to modify the award under the applicable law (L. 1914, ch. 300, as amd.) and that we misinterpreted the evidence and the commissioners’ findings. We hold that the Appellate Division is granted the authority to modify the award by that statute (cf. Matter of Ford [S'isfca], 22 N Y 2d 834; Matter of Ford [Dosseff], 36 A D 2d 352). Upon reargument the parties should confine themselves to the adjusted land value found by the appraisers, the range of evidence and the final land value adopted by the commissioners. Present — -Marsh, P. J., Cardamone, Simons, Mahoney and Witmer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 A.D.2d 713, 364 N.Y.S.2d 257, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8961, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/speach-v-smith-nyappdiv-1975.