From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Rochester Urban Ren. v. Lithograph

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jan 24, 1980
73 A.D.2d 1044 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)

Opinion

January 24, 1980

Appeal from the Monroe Supreme Court.

Present — Cardamone, J.P., Simons, Hancock, Jr., Doerr and Moule, JJ.


Order and judgment unanimously modified and, as modified, affirmed, without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: This appeal arises from a condemnation proceeding brought by Rochester Urban Renewal Agency to acquire certain real property owned by the Hammer Lithograph Corporation. The court below granted Hammer Lithograph a total award of $160,894, and an additional allowance of $6,435.76 for costs. We affirm the award but note that, in computing the total amount, the court made a mathematical error. The total award, as corrected, is $160,864. The additional allowance granted by the court of 4% of the total award should be modified upward to 5% of the award (see Condemnation Law, § 16, subd [2]). In view of the purpose of this allowance to defray the expenses which an owner incurs in establishing the value of his property (New York State Urban Dev. Corp. v Goldfeld, 54 A.D.2d 1099; Matter of Dodge v Tierney, 40 A.D.2d 936) and, in view of the substantial expenses Hammer Lithograph has incurred, the court abused its discretion by failing to grant the full 5% allowance (see Matter of Speach v Smith, 53 A.D.2d 1024).


Summaries of

Matter of Rochester Urban Ren. v. Lithograph

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jan 24, 1980
73 A.D.2d 1044 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)
Case details for

Matter of Rochester Urban Ren. v. Lithograph

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ROCHESTER URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY, Respondent, v. HAMMER…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Jan 24, 1980

Citations

73 A.D.2d 1044 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)

Citing Cases

Matter of Rochstr Urban Renal Agency v. Lee

The court's determination should not be disturbed unless it is unsupported by any fair interpretation of the…