IT IS AN ISSUE OF FACT WHETHER CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARE OFFSET BY ANY BENEFIT BESTOWED BY THE APPROPRIATION AND A TRIAL DETERMINATION OF THAT ISSUE WILL NOT BE OVERTURNED WHERE THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT

LAND WAS APPROPRIATED FROM THE CLAIMNANT BY THE STATE OF NEW YORK FOR A PROPOSED INTERSTATE HIGHWAY. THE STATE ALLEGED THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE HIGHWAY CONSTITUTED A SUFFICIENT BENEFIT TO THE REMAINING PARCELS AND OFF SET ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHICH MIGHT OTHER-WISE HAVE OCCURRED. THE CLAIMANT MAINTAINED THAT THE ONLY BENEFIT THE HIGHWAY COULD BESTOW WAS IMPROVED ACCESS TO TRANSPORTATION ROUTES, BUT SINCE THIS LAND WAS IDEALLY SITUATED IN THAT REGARD THE BENEFIT WAS MINIMAL AND INCAPABLE OF OFFSETTING THE LOSS OF FRONTAGE OCCASIONED BY THE TAKING. THE APPELLATE COURT SUSTAINED THE LOWER COURT'S FINDING OF CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. THIS CASE IS ONE WHERE THE DAMAGES CONTRADICT THE POSSIBILITY OF BENEFIT. (LAKEN REALTY CORP. V. STATE 289 N.Y.S.2D 570 (SUP. CT. APP. DIV. 1968)).

  • Supplemental Notes:
    • No 92, pp 7-8
  • Publication Date: 1969-2

Media Info

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 00238668
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Files: TRIS
  • Created Date: May 5 1994 12:00AM