In re the City of New York

N.Y.

Court: New York Court of Appeals

Citations: 55 N.Y.2d 885, 449 N.Y.S.2d 18, 433 N.E.2d 1266, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3092

Decision Date: 2/9/1982

Jurisdiction: NY

Bluebook Citation: In re the City of New York, 55 N.Y.2d 885, 449 N.Y.S.2d 18, 433 N.E.2d 1266, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3092 (1982)

More Cases: N.Y. decisions from 1982

Citation analytics

How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

★Highly CitedTop 3% most-cited · cited by 76 decisions

Citing decisions

Authorities cited

Courts citing

Citations by decade

1980s1990s2000s2010s2020s

Courts citing this case

N.Y. App. Div.75

N.Y. Sup. Ct., Westchester Cty.1

Most recently cited by10

2026Town of Harrison v. Willow Ridge Country Club, Inc. N.Y. Sup. Ct., Westchester Cty.
2026Matter of Flushing Main St. Improvements Project N.Y. App. Div.
2024Hidden Ponds Home Owners Assn., Inc. v. State of New York N.Y. App. Div.
2022Matter of Chynn v. County of Suffolk N.Y. App. Div.
202220 Rewe St., Ltd. v. State of New York N.Y. App. Div.
2022J. Nazzaro Partnership, L.P. v. State of New York N.Y. App. Div.
2022Matter of New Cr. Bluebelt, Phase (Galarza--City of New York) N.Y. App. Div.
2021Matter of Village of Haverstraw v. Ray Riv. Co., Inc. N.Y. App. Div.
2021Matter of City of New York (Eman Realty Corp.) N.Y. App. Div.
2020DiGiacomo v. State of New York N.Y. App. Div.

Cites 1 case

In re the City of New York

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.

Opinion

In the Matter of the City of New York, Appellant, Relative to Acquiring Title to Real Property for a Project Known as College Point Industrial Park, Urban Renewal Project II. Peter Reiss et al., Respondents.

Attorneys

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Frederick A. O. Schwarz, Jr., Corporation Counsel (Peter A. Mound and Morris Einhorn of counsel), for appellant.
Michael J. Greco and Ignatius John Melito for William A. Gull, respondent.

majority

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the matter remitted to that court for a review of the facts. The Appellate Division increased the plottage increment from 5% to 10% as a matter of law. This was error.

In determining an award to an owner of condemned property, the findings must either be within the range of the expert testimony or be supported by other evidence and adequately explained by the court (Matter of City of New York [A. & W. Realty Corp.], 1 NY2d 428, 432-433; Milsap v State of New York, 32 AD2d 586).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur; Judge Jasen taking no part.

Order reversed, with costs, and matter remitted to the Appellate Division, Second Department, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein.