In re City of Rochester
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Carrolltox A. Roberts, J. On
this application by claimant owner Merton C. Armstrong for an allowance of additional costs pursuant to the Condemnation Law, the City of Rochester is again arguing that the 5% allowance provided for in section 16 of the Condemnation Law should not be made by reason of the fact that this is an urban renewal condemnation. Citing City of Buffalo v. Irish Paper Co. (31 A D 2d 470, 476-477 [4th Dept., 1969], affd. 26 N Y 2d 869 [1970]) and City of Buffalo v. Clement Co. (34 A D 2d 24, 35-37 [4th Dept., 1971], mod. 28 N Y 2d 241, 263-265 [1971]) the city contends that…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Matter of County of Westchester v. BaruchNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- In re SchmiederNew York Supreme Court · 1927
- In re City of RochesterNew York Supreme Court · 1969
- In re the City of RochesterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
- Matter of City of RochesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1927