Pyle v. State

Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: We affirm the award of consequential damages for reasons stated by the Court of Claims (McMahon, J.). We add only that we are unable to review defendant’s contention that the court erred in granting, in part, claimants’ motion for an additional allowance pursuant to EDPL 701 because the motion papers are not a part of the stipulated record on this appeal. In any event, defendant’s contention that the 1987 amendment to EDPL 701 (see, L 1987, ch 771) should not have been applied retroactively lacks merit because the right to the…