Opinion
August 25, 1967
Motion for reargument granted, without costs, and upon reargument the court adheres to its original decision, dated June 20, 1967 ( 28 A.D.2d 774). Even if we were to accept the fact that claimants owned to the middle of Grant Street and that therefore there was a direct appropriation, there was no evidence submitted by claimants establishing any direct damages and the mere fact of a direct taking does not establish a claim for consequential damages based on restriction of access which would avoid the general rule governing restriction of access as dealt with in our decision. We have considered all of claimants' arguments and find them without merit. Gibson, P.J., Herlihy, Aulisi, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur.