From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Meyers v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1995
215 A.D.2d 357 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

May 1, 1995

Appeal from the Court of Claims (Rossetti, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The claimants failed to prove that their property was separated from the Village of Lawrence as a result of the construction of the Nassau Expressway and the defendant's taking of a one-foot-wide strip at the rear of the property. The claimants also failed to prove that they are entitled to compensation for noise and increased traffic (see, Dennison v State of New York, 22 N.Y.2d 409; Valicenti v State of New York, 35 A.D.2d 610; Kauffman v State of New York, 43 A.D.2d 1004, affd 36 N.Y.2d 745).

The severance damages and the cost-to-cure damages adequately compensated the claimants for the loss of access from Doughty Boulevard to their garage (see, Priestly v State of New York, 23 N.Y.2d 152; Matter of County of Rockland [Kohl Indus. Park Co.], 147 A.D.2d 478). Moreover, the damages awarded by the Court of Claims are within the range of damages to which the experts testified at the trial of this claim (see, Matter of City of New York [Reiss], 55 N.Y.2d 885; City of Batavia v Bolas, 174 A.D.2d 993; City of Buffalo v Goldman, 63 A.D.2d 828, 829; Kommit v State of New York, 60 A.D.2d 945).

We have examined the claimants' remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Sullivan, J.P., O'Brien, Ritter and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Meyers v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1995
215 A.D.2d 357 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Meyers v. State

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL MEYERS et al., Appellants, v. STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent. (Claim…

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

Date published: May 1, 1995

Citations

215 A.D.2d 357 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
626 N.Y.S.2d 216

Citing Cases

State v. Anderson

For purposes of clarifying the law in this appellate district, we shall first take up the second assignment…

In the Matter of City of New York, 2009 NY Slip Op 52528(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 12/15/2009)

"Accordingly, it has been held that [l]oss of enhancement due to the location and esthetic qualities of a…