In re Ludlow Avenue & Whitlock Avenue
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal from Special Term, New York County. In the matter of proceedings by the City of New York to acquire the fee in certain property to improve Ludlow Avenue, Whitlock Avenue, and the public place at the intersection of Whitlock Avenue, Hunt’s Point Road, and the Southern Boulevard, etc.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Special Term, New York County. In the matter of proceedings by the City of New York to acquire the fee in certain property to improve Ludlow Avenue, Whitlock Avenue, and the public place at the intersection of Whitlock Avenue, Hunt’s Point Road, and the Southern Boulevard, etc. From an order denying a motion to confirm the report of commissioners of estimate as to certain parcels of the land, and returning the report to said commissioners with instructions, Schwartz, a property owner appeals. Reversed.
1Opinion of the CourtScott, J.
The appellant owns a parcel of land sought to be acquired in this proceeding, upon which he has made substantial improve^ ments, and for which the commissioners of estimate have made a substantial award. The city of New York, while conceding that appellant owns the plot in fee, claims that it is so incumbered with easements for street purposes that appellant’s fee is of merely nominal value. This view is upheld by the order appealed from. We are advised by the briefs that there are a number of other lots involved in this proceeding as to which the same questions arise, and as to which it has…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Walker v. . CaywoodNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Horey v. . Village of HaverstrawNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co. v. . City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
- New York Central & Hudson River Railroad v. City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
- Bradley v. . CraneNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Silver Beach Realty Corp. v. GeelanNew York Supreme Court · 1924