Village of Port Chester v. Martinez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Village of Port Chester v. Martinez

5 A.D.3d 692, 774 N.Y.S.2d 751, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3324

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

DecidedMarch 22, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 5 A.D.3d 692 (Village of Port Chester v. Martinez) 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

Village of Port Chester v. Martinez, 5 A.D.3d 692, 774 N.Y.S.2d 751, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3324 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In a condemnation proceeding, Maria Martinez, doing business as Mark Anthony Restaurant, appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rosato, J.), entered April 17, 2003, as granted the petitioner’s separate motions to dismiss her claim for the taking of trade fixtures and for a writ of assistance for possession pursuant to EDPL 405 (A).

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The appellant, who leased a building on certain condemned property, sought to be compensated for various trade fixtures that she claimed to have paid for and installed. However, according to the terms of her lease, they were her landlord’s property. Under these circumstances, the Supreme Court correctly dismissed her claim (see Matter of City of New York [G & C Amusements], 55 NY2d 353, 359, 361 [1982]; Interlake Serv. Sta. v State of New York, 249 AD2d 275, 276 [1998]), and granted a writ of assistance (see EDPL 405 [A]; Matter of Village of Port Chester [Sorto], 303 AD2d 416, 417 [2003]). Ritter, J.P., H. Miller, Crane and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

In a condemnation proceeding, Maria Martinez, doing business as Mark Anthony Restaurant, appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rosato, J.), entered April 17, 2003, as granted the petitioner’s separate motions to dismiss her claim for the taking of trade fixtures and for a writ of assistance for possession pursuant to EDPL 405 (A).

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The appellant, who leased a building on certain condemned property, sought to be compensated for various trade fixtures that she claimed to have paid for and installed. However, according to the terms of her lease, they were her landlord’s property. Under these circumstances, the Supreme Court correctly dismissed her claim (see Matter of City of New York [G & C Amusements], 55 NY2d 353, 359, 361 [1982]; Interlake Serv. Sta. v State of New York, 249 AD2d 275, 276 [1998]), and granted a writ of assistance (see EDPL 405 [A]; Matter of Village of Port Chester [Sorto], 303 AD2d 416, 417 [2003]). Ritter, J.P., H. Miller, Crane and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.3d 692, 774 N.Y.S.2d 751, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3324, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/village-of-port-chester-v-martinez-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack