General
In the Matter of Williamsburgh II Urban Renewal Area. G.E.F. Holding Corp., Respondent; City of New York, Appellant
208 A.D.2d 548616 N.Y.S.2d 785·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1994·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
In the Matter of Williamsburgh II Urban Renewal Area. G.E.F. Holding Corp., Respondent; City of New York, Appellant.
[616 NYS2d 785]
[MAJORITY]
—In a condemnation proceeding, the condemnor appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Leone, J.), dated September 16, 1992, as awarded the claimant $42,022.60 as an additional allowance pursuant to EDPL 701.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
In this case, the condemnor’s offer was $52,000, while the claimant was awarded $152,000. As the $100,000 difference was 192% above the offer, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the claimant an additional award of $42,022.60 comprised of an attorneys’ fee of $38,822.60, an appraiser’s fee of $2,500, and a transcript fee of $700 (see, EDPL 701; Hakes v State of New York, 81 NY2d 392, 397-398; Matter of E.D.J. Quality Realty Corp. v Village of Massapequa Park, 204 AD2d 321; Matter of County of Suffolk v Johnathan, 190 AD2d 848; Hoffman v Town of Malta, 189 AD2d 968; Scuderi v State of New York, 184 AD2d 1073, 1074; Matter of Malin v State of New York, 183 AD2d 899). We have considered the condemnor’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter and Florio, JJ., concur.