In re Ford
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Order affirmed, with costs. We agree with the Appellate Division that claimants’ privilege under the 1927 deed "to bathe in Flagler Lake” was a mere license, not an easement (see, also, 3 Warren’s Weed, New York Real Property, License, .§ 1.03). Thus, the claim is for indirect damage to real estate "not taken” (Administrative Code of City of New York, § K5144.0) and interest runs only from the date the award was confirmed, not the date of the taking (Hudson Riv. Tel. Co. v City of New York, 210 NY 394, 397-398).
Concur: Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hudson River Telephone Co. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1914
3Cited by2 opinions
- Wachs v. WinterDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1983
- Scheer v. KahnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995