Court of Appeals of New York

In a suit alleging inverse condemnation, unjust enrichment, trespass, and deceptive trade practices stemming from defendants' attachment to the plaintiffs' apartment building of a terminal box that enabled the defendants to furnish telephone service to that building and a number of others, the Court of Appeals holds that: 1) the complaint stated a valid inverse condemnation claim; 2) the inverse condemnation claim was not time-barred pursuant to Real Property Law section 261; 3) the claim for deceptive trade practices was barred by the three-year statute of limitations of CPLR 214(2); 4) the plaintiffs did not state a valid unjust enrichment claim; and 5) the courts below did not abuse their discretion in denying class certification.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/29/2012
• Published 03/29/2012

Judges

• Smith

Court

• Court of Appeals of New York

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Patrick F. Philbin, David M. Wise