New York Court of Appeals, 1966

Van Kleeck v. State

New York Court of Appeals · Decided November 29, 1966 · Desmond, Fuld, Voorhis, Burke, Soileppi, Bergan, Keating

18 N.Y.2d 897; 276 N.Y.S.2d 633; 223 N.E.2d 41; 1966 N.Y. LEXIS 970

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision.

In re City of New York (New York Supreme Court 2008)
In re West Bushwick Urban Renewal Area, Phase 2 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
In re West Bushwick Urban Renewal Area (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
In re Town of Hempstead (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1983)
In re Town of Hempstead (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1981)
Kaufman v. State (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1977)
In re the County of Suffolk (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1977)
Zeitlin v. State (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1977)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

*899 Memorandum. The order appealed from should be modified (see Cornell v. T. V. Development Corp., 17 N Y 2d 69, 73). Since the property was valued on a commercial basis, no value should have been assigned to the buildings on the property, which were inconsistent with that use (Matter of Erlanger, 237 N. Y. 159, 164; Spano v. State of New York, 22 A D 2d 757). Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Division is modified to the extent of striking therefrom so much as awards $15,000 for the buildings and, as modified, the order is affirmed, with costs.

Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Fuld, Yan Voorhis, Burke, Soileppi, Bergan and Keating concur.

Order modified in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.