Legal Opinion

Roth v. State

New York Court of Claims

Decided January 25, 1957No. Claim No. 33390; Claim No. 33391PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRichard S. Heller, J.

These two claims to recover damages for the appropriation of property were tried together. The evidence presented applies in large part to both cases.

*392On November 18, 1953 the State filed appropriation maps taking permanent easements for flood control purposes, for the construction, reconstruction, maintenance and operation of walls, stream channel, conduit, work area, drainage, public and private utilities and appurtenances to all structures. There was reserved to the owner of the property the right to use the property provided the use in the opinion of the Superintendent of Public Works does…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Sparkill Realty Corp. v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1938
  2. Sparkill Realty Corporation v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
  3. Sparkill Realty Corp. v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1935

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. King v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1966
  2. Taner v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1958

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API