Legal Opinion

Rome Urban Renewal Agency v. Sanzone

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

Decided January 16, 1976PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: This being a condemnation proceeding as distinguished from an appropriation case, the power of the court to review the award of the Commissioners is strictly limited (City of Niagara Falls v New York Cent. R. R. Co., 31 AD2d 780). In Niagara Falls Urban Renewal Agency v Harkins (40 AD2d 1075, mot for lv to app den 31 NY2d 648), we reaffirmed the limited judicial review authority in such proceedings, observing that: "The court cannot modify but must either confirm the report or reject it for irregularities in the proceeding, or because it is…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. In re HuieNew York Court of Appeals · 1956
  2. Dodge v. TierneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972
  3. Niagara Falls Urban Renewal Agency v. HarkinsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972
  4. City of Niagara Falls v. New York Central RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1969
  5. County of Niagara v. BagwellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1971

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Village of Hilton v. EdelmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API