Legal Opinion

Town of Esopus v. Gordon

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 27, 1989PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

John G. Connor, J.

By notice of motion respondents/plaintiffs seek an order pursuant to EDPL 701 granting to them as condemnees an additional allowance for extraordinary expenses incurred for expert witnesses and legal counsel.

*194EDPL 701 as amended in 1982 reads as follows:

"701. Additional allowance
"In instances where the order or award is at least two hundred percent of the amount of the condemnor’s proof and where it shall appear to the court that a condemnee has borne extraordinary expenses for expert witnesses fees beyond the expense for the preparation of an expert…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Dodge v. TierneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972
  2. Niagara Falls Urban Renewal Agency v. Pomeroy Real Estate Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Karas v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  2. Frisbro Enterprises, Ltd. v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1989
  3. Michael v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  4. In re the New York City Transit AuthorityNew York Supreme Court · 1991
  5. City of Long Beach v. Sun NLF Ltd. PartnershipAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API