Opinion
January 14, 1971
Appeal from the Court of Claims.
Present — Del Vecchio, J.P., Marsh, Gabrielli, Moule and Henry, JJ.
Judgment unanimously modified on the law and facts in accordance with the memorandum herein, and as modified affirmed, with costs to claimant. Memorandum: Claimant appeals from a judgment of the Court of Claims awarding $2,393.25 in damages for the appropriation of a roof-mounted bulletin sign board. The court computed the award on the basis of reproduction costs adopted by both parties less a depreciation allowance fixed by the court, but without including builder's overhead and profit in the reproduction costs. The court's failure to allow for builder's overhead and profit as an includable item in calculating reproduction costs was error. The law is well established that the cost of reproduction is determined by estimating the costs of materials and adding to that the costs of construction including all necessary overhead expenses. (5 Nichols, Eminent Domain [3d ed.], § 20.2[3]; 2 Orgel, Valuation under Eminent Domain, § 193.) The State's own expert, a person engaged in the business of constructing and erecting signs, testified that the reproduction cost figures set forth by him, which figures were adopted by the court, did not represent the price that his company would charge claimant to reproduce signs similar to those appropriated, but that he would charge claimant an additional 33 1/3% to cover his overhead and profit. The reproduction cost figures adopted by the court should therefore be increased by 33 1/3% as urged by claimant. We find no basis in the record for disturbing the court's findings as to allowable depreciation. The judgment should be modified by increasing the amount computed as reproduction costs by 33 1/3%, which, after deducting depreciation would increase the damages awarded to $3,191.25.