Queensboro Farm Products v. State
| Decision Date | 26 February 1959 |
| Docket Number | No. 32788,32788 |
| Citation | 184 N.Y.S.2d 844,157 N.E.2d 719,5 N.Y.2d 977 |
| Parties | , 157 N.E.2d 719 QUEENSBORO FARM PRODUCTS, INC., Respondent, v. STATE of New York, Appellant. (Claim). Court of Appeals of New York |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, 5 A.D.2d 967, 171 N.Y.S.2d 646.
Claimant filed claims against the State of New York for damages for statutory and de facto permanent appropriations of portions of claimant's premises owned in fee, portions of claimant's leased premises, the taking and destruction of claimant's water pipe lines, pipe line easement, and license, and closing of street, which was the only means of access from public highway system to claimant's milk plant.
The Court of Claims, Charles T. Major, J., 6 Misc.2d 445, 161 N.Y.S.2d 989, entered judgment in favor of the claimant for $42,000 and interest, and the State appealed.
The Appellate Division, 5 A.D.2d 967, 171 N.Y.S.2d 646, affirmed the judgment. Williams and Halpern, JJ., dissented.
The State appealed to the Court of Appeals, and the claimant contended in the Court of Appeals that claimant's ownership of leased premises, springs, plant manager's home, and pipe lines permitted by easement and license, were one single entity, and that taking of the easements together with fee and leasehold takings required valuation of claimant's properties before and after the taking, and that a taking of claimant's easements of access occurred, and that the State did not and could not offer in lieu of damages sustained on filing of street closing map as of March 12, 1953, a new proposed road which was not completed until August, 1954, and that, in any event, the new access road built more than a year after closing of original road was not a suitable substitute means of access, and that the State could not appropriate claimant's lands and easements for pipe lines and, in an attempt to diminish damages, substitute in a different location a new proposed water line right of way in favor of claimant, in lieu of damages flowing from original appropriation, and that claimant was entitled to have its damages compensated in money, and not in land or easements foisted on it without its consent.
Skinner & Bermant, New York City (Bernard L. Bermant, New York City, of counsel), for respondent.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.
All concur except BURKE, J., who dissents and votes to reverse upon the dissenting memorandum of Williams and Halpern, JJ., in the Appellate Division.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Strong v. State
...Farm Prods. v. State of New York, 6 Misc.2d 445, 449, 161 N.Y.S.2d 989, 993, affd. 5 A.D.2d 967, 171 N.Y.S.2d 646, affd. 5 N.Y.2d 977, 184 N.Y.S.2d 844, 157 N.E.2d 719), there was evidence establishing that there was unity of title and unity of use, an essential predicate to an award (Ephra......
-
State ex rel. State Highway Dept. v. Kistler-Collister Co., Inc.
...188 N.Y. 58, 69, 80 N.E. 573; Queensboro Farm Products, Inc. v. State of New York, 5 A.D.2d 967, 171 N.Y.S.2d 646, aff'd 5 N.Y.2d 977, 184 N.Y.S.2d 844, 157 N.E.2d 719.' Although the trial court instructed that it was proper for the jury to consider loss of income and extra expense caused K......
-
Mastic Acres, Inc. v. State
... ... United States v. Dow, 357 U.S. 17, 78 S.Ct. 1039, 2 L.E.2d 1109; Queensboro Farm Products, Inc. v. State of New York, 6 Misc.2d 445, 161 N.Y.S.2d 989, aff'd 5 A.D.2d 967, 171 ... ...
-
Wolfe v. State, 41115
...Farm Products, Inc. v. State of New York, 6 Misc.2d 445, 161 N.Y.S.2d 989, affd. 5 A.D.2d 967, 171 N.Y.S.2d 646, affd. 5 N.Y.2d 977, 184 N.Y.S.2d 844, 157 N.E.2d 719; Minesta Realty Co. v. State of New York, 26 A.D.2d 592, 272 N.Y.S.2d 121.) 'Once the land is actually taken,' the court wrot......