From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Ossining Urban Ren. Ag. v. Lord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 3, 1986
118 A.D.2d 575 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

March 3, 1986

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Sullivan, J.).


Appeal from the order dismissed, without costs or disbursements (see, Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248).

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We find no merit to the appellant's contention that the supplemental report of the Commissioners of Appraisal was too vague, precluding intelligent judicial review. The damage issues have been extensively litigated and we find no reason to disturb the Commissioners' award (see, Matter of Huie [Fletcher — City of New York], 2 N.Y.2d 168, 171).

We also find no merit to the appellant's contention that interest should have run from the 1983 decision herein of the Court of Appeals (see, Matter of Ossining Urban Renewal Agency v Lord, 60 N.Y.2d 845), determining that Pine Top Building Corp. had become landlocked by the subject condemnation. The taking was in 1973. The reports of both appraisers state that fact and there was no issue as to the taking year. Accordingly, interest was properly payable from the taking date. Gibbons, J.P., Thompson, Brown and Weinstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Ossining Urban Ren. Ag. v. Lord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 3, 1986
118 A.D.2d 575 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

Matter of Ossining Urban Ren. Ag. v. Lord

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of OSSINING URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY, Appellant, v. ELISSA LORD…

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

Date published: Mar 3, 1986

Citations

118 A.D.2d 575 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)