In the Matter of the Application of Gordon D. MacDougall for Reargument of Motion Heretofore Made on Behalf of Rose Reichert for Leave to Reopen the Proceeding Entitled: "In the Matter of the Application of the City of New York, Relative to Acquiring Title, Wherever the Same Has Not Been Heretofore Acquired for the Same Purpose in Fee to the Real Property Required for the Opening and Extending of Baisley Boulevard (Locust Avenue-Oakfield Street) from New York Boulevard (Avenue) to Farmers Boulevard (Avenue) in the Borough of Queens, City of New York," in so far as it Affects Parcels Damage Nos. 16 and 17. The City of New York, Appellant; Rose Reichert, Respondent

In the Matter of the Application of Gordon D. MacDougall for Reargument of Motion Heretofore Made on Behalf of Rose Reichert for Leave to Reopen the Proceeding Entitled: “ In the Matter of the Application of the City of New York, Relative to Acquiring Title, Wherever the Same Has Not Been Heretofore Acquired for the Same Purpose in Fee to the Real Property Required for the Opening and Extending of Baisley Boulevard (Locust Avenue-Oakfield Street) from New York Boulevard (Avenue) to Farmers Boulevard (Avenue) in the Borough of Queens, City of New York,” in so far as it Affects Parcels Damage Nos. 16 and 17. The City of New York, Appellant; Rose Reichert, Respondent. [MAJORITY] Order reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and respondent’s motion denied, with ten dollars costs. The Special Term was without power to amend the final decree by increasing the award to the respondent. (Matter of City of New York [Northern Blvd.], 242 App. Div. 839; Matter of City of New York [Dickens Ave.], 238 id. 850; affd., 262 N. Y. 699.) Hagarty, Tompkins, Davis and Johnston, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., concurs in result.