Legal Opinion
Jo & Wo Realty Corp. v. City of New York
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 16, 1988PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
David B. Saxe, J.
The issue that I am asked to decide, raised by defendants’ *156challenge to this taxpayer action, is whether a site designated, condemned, and reconstructed pursuant to an urban renewal program retains its status as urban renewal property after the completion of construction under the original urban renewal plan.
In this taxpayer action under General Municipal Law § 51, it is alleged that the sale of the Coliseum site at Columbus Circle (the site) constituted a waste of taxpayers’ funds because competitive bidding was not used. The complaint requests a…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- S. J. Capelin Associates, Inc. v. Globe Manufacturing Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Mallad Construction Corp. v. County Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
- Kaskel v. ImpellitteriNew York Court of Appeals · 1953
- New York Post Corp. v. MosesNew York Court of Appeals · 1961
- Citiwide News, Inc. v. New York City Transit AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Jo & Wo Realty Corp. v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Palmateer v. Greene County Industrial Development AgencyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Coalition Against Columbus Center v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1991
- Committee for Environmentally Sound Development, Inc. v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 2001
- Jo & Wo Realty Corp. v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990