Legal Opinion

Niagara Falls Urban Renewal Agency v. Harkins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 12, 1972PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The sole issue presented on this appeal is whether the order confirming the report and award of the Commissioners in a condemnation proceeding should be modified on the ground that the award is excessive. In City of Niagara Falls v. New York Cent. R. R. Co. (31 A D 2d 780) we stated that in a condemnation proceeding, as distinguished from an appropriation case, the power of the court to review is- strictly limited. The court cannot modify but must either confirm the report or reject it for irregularities in the proceeding, or…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Auburn Urban Renewal Agency v. Samuel Schwartz Sons, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
  2. Village of Hilton v. EdelmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
  3. New York State Urban Development Corp. v. GoldfeldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1975
  4. Rome Urban Renewal Agency v. Rome Television Center, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
  5. Rome Urban Renewal Agency v. SanzoneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API