From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rice v. Ritz Associates

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 17, 1983
58 N.Y.2d 923 (N.Y. 1983)

Opinion

Argued January 11, 1983

Decided February 17, 1983

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, IRVING KIRSCHENBAUM, J.

Marvin E. Frankel, H. Richard Penn and Barry G. Felder for appellant.

J. Irwin Shapiro and John Drew for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

Order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division ( 88 A.D.2d 513).

As to plaintiff's contention that by virtue of the lease there was an effective transfer of the air rights of the Rice parcel to the Ritz parcel, thereby constituting an "incumbrance" on the Rice parcel within the contemplation of the appraisal procedure clause explicitly set forth in the lease which the prevailing appraisers failed to consider in their appraisal, we express no view with respect to it as this issue was not presented to or considered by the trial court. ( Farr v Newman, 14 N.Y.2d 183, 188; see, also, Telaro v Telaro, 25 N.Y.2d 433, 438; Cohen and Karger, Powers of the New York Court of Appeals [rev ed], § 162, p 631.)

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and SIMONS concur; Judge MEYER taking no part.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.


Summaries of

Rice v. Ritz Associates

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 17, 1983
58 N.Y.2d 923 (N.Y. 1983)
Case details for

Rice v. Ritz Associates

Case Details

Full title:HENRY H. RICE, Appellant, v. RITZ ASSOCIATES, INC., Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Feb 17, 1983

Citations

58 N.Y.2d 923 (N.Y. 1983)
460 N.Y.S.2d 510
447 N.E.2d 58

Citing Cases

Vitale v. Friedman

The IAS Court correctly held that the parties' lease was unambiguous in calling for an appraisal of fair…

Vitale v. Friedman

Appraisers have broad discretion as to their methods and sources of information ( Perlbinder v. Jakubovitz,…