Opinion
2001-01650, 2002-00285
Argued April 23, 2002.
May 13, 2002.
In a claim to recover damages for the appropriation of real property, the claimant appeals (1), as limited by its brief, from stated portions of an order of the Court of Claims (O'Rourke, J.), dated December 20, 2000, and (2), on the ground of inadequacy, from so much of a judgment of the same court, dated January 23, 2001, as, after a nonjury trial, is in favor and against the defendant as to property identified as "Parcel 2."
Wallace Wallace, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Herbert N. Wallace of counsel), for appellant.
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General, New York, N.Y. (Peter H. Schiff and Michael S. Buskus of counsel), for respondent.
Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
ORDERED that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it further,
ORDERED that the State of New York is awarded one bill of costs.
The appeal from the intermediate order dated December 20, 2000, must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see CPLR 5501[a][1]).
Contrary to the claimant's contention, the Court of Claims properly credited the State's expert evidence that the highest and best use of the appropriated parcel remained unchanged after the taking, and in utilizing the State's methodology for calculating the consequential damages (see Bienenstock v. State of New York, 287 A.D.2d 587, 588; Matter of City of Newburgh v. Kirchner, 234 A.D.2d 364; Matter of Town of Islip v. Sikora, 220 A.D.2d 434; Gold-Mark 35 Assoc. v. State of New York, 210 A.D.2d 377, 379).
RITTER, J.P., SMITH, LUCIANO and CRANE, JJ., concur.