Terrace Estates v. City of New Britain
| Decision Date | 18 June 1974 |
| Citation | 352 A.2d 303,166 Conn. 469 |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Parties | TERRACE ESTATES v. CITY OF NEW BRITAIN. |
Lawrence P. Weisman, Bridgeport, with whom, on the brief, was Austin K. Wolf, Bridgeport, for appellant (plaintiff).
George J. Coyle, New Britain, for appellee (defendant).
Before HOUSE, C.J., and SHAPIRO, LOISELLE, MacDONALD and BOGDANSKI, JJ.
This appeal arises out of the condemnation by the city of New Britain of a portion of a tract of land owned by the plaintiff, Terrace Estates. Terrace Estates appealed the assessment of damages to the Superior Court. In a separate case, Carabetta Enterprises, Inc., which had contracted to purchase the entire tract from Terrace Estates, also appealed to the Superior Court from the assessment of damages for the taking. Terrace Estates and Carabetta Enterprises were not parties to each other's appeals. The two appeals were consolidated and referred to Hon. Raymond E. Baldwin, a state referee. The referee, exercising the powers of the Superior Court, rendered a judgment in the Terrace Estates case, from which Terrace Estates has appealed to this court. Terrace Estates v. City of New Britain is the only case presently before this court. Carabetta Enterprises is not one of the parties before us.
The state referee found that on September 14, 1970, the date of the taking, the fair market value of the land taken, 'in its raw state,' was $344,000, but that the value was increased as a result of expenditures totalling $62,093 made by Carabetta Enterprises to develop the land pursuant to its contract of purchase. Accordingly, the referee concluded that the fair market value of the parcel taken was $406,000. The parties do not dispute that valuation in this appeal.
The referee also found that Carabetta Enterprises had paid the sum of $53,000 toward the purchase price under its contract with Terrace Estates and that, of that amount, the sum of $24,910 was properly allocated to the land taken. The referee thereupon concluded that Terrace Estates was entitled to $406,000 less $87,003 ($62,093 plus $24,910), or $318,997. Since the city of New Britain had already deposited $175,000 with the court, the referee rendered judgment in Terrace Estates v. City of New Britain ordering the city to pay Terrace Estates the deficiency, or $143,997. plus interest and costs.
Terrace Estates does not dispute the reduction of $62,093, but contends that the referee erred in reducing its compensation by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. Smith
...was entitled to full faith and credit can only be reviewed by this court on the basis of a corrected finding. Terrace Estates v. New Britain, 166 Conn. 469, 471, 352 A.2d 303. Thus, since the plaintiff does not seek to add to the finding material facts supporting this claim, we are limited ......
-
Ledgebrook Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Lusk Corp.
...of $225,000 should be granted is not supported by the affidavit or the corrected finding. It cannot stand. Terrace Estates v. New Britain, 166 Conn. 469, 471, 352 A.2d 303; Cecio Bros., Inc. v. Feldmann, 161 Conn. 265, 271, 287 A.2d 374; Maltbie, Conn.App.Proc. § There is error, the judgmen......
-
Barbieri v. Cadillac Const. Corp.
...tested by this court only by a review of the subordinate facts found by the trial court as corrected on appeal. Terrace Estates v. New Britain, 166 Conn. 469, 471, 352 A.2d 303. However, the conclusion of the court below was drawn with the possibly damaging reference to the plaintiff's repu......