Navigation

Archive | 2019

May 6, 2019

PUBLIC USE MEANS JUST ABOUT ANY USE

          Arguing that the project will benefit a private party and that the proposed condemnation will there by violate the constitutional restraints against the condemning private party to give another private party will fail as long as it could be said the public purpose is dominant.  See Waldo’s, Inc. v Vill. Of Johnson City, 74 NY2d 718, 720 (1989); see also Yonkers Cmty. Dev. Agency v Morris, 27 NY2d 478, 482 (1975).           Virtually any purpose will be acceptable including the condemnation of a historic waterfront for a shopping mall… read more

By
Posted in Public Benefit, Public Purpose, Public Use, Uncategorized
Read more > 0

May 3, 2019

JUST COMPENSATION FOR GOODWILL

          The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires the court to award just and fair compensation.  But goodwill is rarely compensated.  Rather the courts will utilize a market approach unless property is truly unique, or to be exactly operated as before by the condemnor.  Matter of Nassau County (Lido Boulevard), 43 AD2d 45 (2d Dept 1973), afd. 39 NY2d 958 (1976).           State and federal courts have long ignored the mandate to pay just compensation for the goodwill of a business.  In New York, trade fixtures used for… read more

By
Posted in Going Concern, Goodwill, Uncategorized
Read more > 0

April 30, 2019

TRUMP’S WALL – A MIRAGE IN THE DESERT

          Donald Trump has made building a wall along the southwest border a cornerstone of his administration.  Trump has misappropriated government funds including $3.6 billion in money which was allocated for military construction to build the wall, but there is one necessary element missing, “the land.”  Congress – even while under Republican control, has repeatedly refused to appropriate the money demanded by the President to fund the project.           There are 1,350 miles of the southern border which is unfenced.  He originally wanted to fence 1,000 miles, but has reduced… read more

By
Posted in Border Wall, Ineffective Eminent Domain, Property Rights, Uncategorized
Read more > 0

April 25, 2019

DOES ACQUIRING PROPERTY TO RETURN IT TO PRODUCTIVE USE SERVE A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE? OR, IS LAND BANKING SPECULATIVE AND IMPROPER?

          The Second Department handed down two decisions in two consecutive weeks deciding challenges to determinations adopted to condemn property by eminent domain for the purpose of returning the property to productive use in accordance with the City of Yonkers Master Plan in two separate urban renewal plans.  Matter of One Point St. Inc. v City of Yonkers Indus. Dev. Agency, ____ AD3d ____, 2019 NY Slip Op 01769 (March 13, 2019); Matter of City of New York v Yonkers Industrial Development Agency, ____ AD3d ____, 2019 NY Slip Op… read more

By
Posted in Challenges to Condemnation, EDPL Sec. 207, Land Banking, Speculative Taking, Uncategorized
Read more > 0

April 22, 2019

SOMETHING IS ROTTEN IN THE COUNTY OF ROCKLAND: The corrupt process of exercising the awesome power of eminent domain.

          Recently, the Second Department affirmed an additional allowance pursuant to EDPL Sec. 701 to the extent of awarding $233,391.46.  Matter of Village of Spring Valley (Little Angel Day Care Center, Inc.).  Joshua H. Rikon tried the trade fixture claim and argued the appeal.           The Village, as it has in past cases, offered a low-ball appraisal and paid an advance payment of $90,960.           The trial court awarded $469,114 as just compensation.  The award was previously affirmed and claimant thereafter moved for the additional allowance.  Little Angel was fully… read more

By
Posted in Bad Faith, Just Compensation, Mendacious Argument, Uncategorized
Read more > 0