Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Matter of the Application of the USA NIAGARA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION to Acquire Title in fee Simple to Certain Property Necessary for a Project Known as the Niagara Falls Convention and Conference Facility Civic Project Relating to the Following Tax Sections, Blocks and Lots in the City of Niagara Falls, Niagara County, New York: 159.09-1-7.21; 159.09-1-7.22; and 159.09-1-7.01. Settco, LLC, Claimant-Respondent, v. USA Niagara Development Corporation, Respondent-Appellant.
Claimant commenced this proceeding to recover damages for the condemnation of its real property by respondent. On appeal from an order awarding claimant the sum of $5,107,500, with interest, as the value of the condemned property, respondent contends that Supreme Court erred in adopting the value of $45 per square foot advanced by claimant without appropriately weighing the evidence. We reject that contention. “In a condemnation case, the court's award should be upheld where it is within the range of expert testimony or [is] otherwise supported by the evidence and adequately explained by the court” (Transitown Plaza Assoc. v. State of New York, 1 A.D.3d 997, 997, 767 N.Y.S.2d 349). Here, the court's determination that the subject property is worth $45 per square foot is within the range of expert testimony inasmuch as it is directly supported by the testimony of claimant's appraiser. Moreover, we conclude that the court properly determined that the comparable sales upon which respondent's appraiser relied were “less reliable as fair market indicators” than those upon which claimant's appraiser relied.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: September 22, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)