Wood v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wood v. State

22 A.D.2d 756, 253 N.Y.S.2d 738, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2900

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

DecidedOctober 29, 1964

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 22 A.D.2d 756 (Wood 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

Wood v. State, 22 A.D.2d 756, 253 N.Y.S.2d 738, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2900 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Case held, decision reserved, and matter remitted to the Trial Judge for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum. Upon the making of such findings the case is directed to be restored to the calendar of this court. Memorandum: The award was made in one sum. It included an amount (1) for the fair value of the land taken, (2) for consequential damages to the remainder of the property by reason of the appropriation, (3) for the damage resulting from the material reduction of access to the property. Separate findings should be made as to the amount awarded for each of these elements. (See Wineburgh v. State of New York, 20 A D 2d 961; Chisholm-Ryder v. State of New York, 21 A D 2d 748; Ahlheim v. State of New York, 21 A D 2d 747. (Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims for claimants in an action for damages resulting from permanent appropriation of realty.) Present—Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Noonan and Del Vecchio, JJ.

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

Case held, decision reserved, and matter remitted to the Trial Judge for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum. Upon the making of such findings the case is directed to be restored to the calendar of this court. Memorandum: The award was made in one sum. It included an amount (1) for the fair value of the land taken, (2) for consequential damages to the remainder of the property by reason of the appropriation, (3) for the damage resulting from the material reduction of access to the property. Separate findings should be made as to the amount awarded for each of these elements. (See Wineburgh v. State of New York, 20 A D 2d 961; Chisholm-Ryder v. State of New York, 21 A D 2d 748; Ahlheim v. State of New York, 21 A D 2d 747. (Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims for claimants in an action for damages resulting from permanent appropriation of realty.) Present—Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Noonan and Del Vecchio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.2d 756, 253 N.Y.S.2d 738, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2900, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wood-v-state-nyappdiv-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack