Navigation

Author Archive | Michael Rikon

June 26, 2018

A CONDEMNOR CAN KEEP TRYING TO CONDEMN – UNTIL IT GETS IT RIGHT

The Third Department handed down a decision on June 21, 2018 in Johnson v Town of Caroga, ___ AD3d ____ (3d Dept 2018).  This was a challenge pursuant to EDPL 207 to a “Determination and Findings” adopted by the Town to acquire a roughly 15-foot-wide strip of land for the purposes of providing expanded access to a recreational trail.  There was an earlier and successful challenge.  Matter of Johnson v Town of Caroga, 157 AD3d 1025 (2018).  The Town issued resolutions recommencing the eminent domain process and this time got… read more

By
Posted in Challenges to Determination and Findings, EDPL 207
Read more > 0

June 22, 2018

CONDEMNATION’S MIGHTY HAND

It surprises some that eminent domain in New York can be utilized to acquire property interests other than real estate fee title and trade fixtures.  Section 103(F) of the Eminent Domain Procedure Law (EDPL) defines real property as including “all land and improvements, …all easements and hereditaments, corporeal or incorporeal, and every estate, interest and right, legal or equitable, in lands or water, and right, interest, privilege, easement and franchise relating to the same, including terms for years and liens by way of mortgage or otherwise.” Section 708 of the… read more

By
Posted in EDPL Section 708, Personal Property, Right of First Refusal
Read more > 0

June 20, 2018

CAREFUL JUDGE – THAT CONDEMNATION IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED

We have written on this subject before, but somehow some judges do not get it.  A condemnation proceeding is not like private litigation.  A condemnation claim is the enforcement of a constitutional mandate that just compensation be paid. Even if the claimant fails in the burden of proof, it is not that he will be non-suited and receive no compensation.  Rather, in this worst-case scenario, the claimant will simply receive the amount proven by the condemnor.  In New York, the burden of proof is on the court to assure that… read more

By
Posted in Burden of Proof, Offer & Compensation, Trial Preparation
Read more > 0

June 15, 2018

THINK TWICE BEFORE AGREEING TO ALLOW STREET ARTISTS TO PAINT ON YOUR BUILDING

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York refused to set aside the Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law and grant a new trial to Cohen et al. v G & M Realty L.P. et anos, Case No. 13-CV-05612 (FB) (RLM).  In an unusual decision, Senior District Judge Frederic Block awarded $6,750,000 as statutory damages for the willful destruction of Plaintiffs’ works of visual art by Defendant Gerald Wolkoff.  The art was graffiti on a group of dilapidated buildings in Long Island City, Queens. … read more

By
Posted in Graffiti, Protected Art, Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990
Read more > 0

June 6, 2018

TAXES ON PARKLAND – NEVER

The Second Department handed down an interesting case today, Town of North Hempstead v County of Nassau, ___ AD3d ___, June 6, 2018.  The facts are somewhat difficult, but I shall try to simplify.  In 2005, land was conveyed to the Town of North Hempstead for use as a public park.  The real property was used as a park since that date. The Town failed to record the 2005 deed until December 2008.  Meanwhile the County was assessing taxes on the land and sold the tax liens to an individual. … read more

By
Posted in parklands, RPTL 406, Tax Assessment
Read more > 0