Navigation

Archive | 2015

September 18, 2015

Drafts are Required to be Retained Under Appraisal Standards

The following is a response to a comment from Mr. Rikon’s latest column in the New York Law Journal, which we recently posted here. Below, Mr. Rikon further describes the requirement under USPAP for a condemnation expert to retain his work file for cross-examination purposes. Drafts are Required to be Retained Under Appraisal Standards I write this in response to the comment made by Fred Kolikoff, Esq. dated September 1, 2015.  Mr. Kolikoff, a former Assistant Corporation Counsel for the City of New York, found fault in an article I… read more

By
Posted in Appraisers, Cross Examination, Published Articles, USPAP, Work file
Read more > 0

September 10, 2015

Taking Your Property for Extractable Gas

A news story published September 8, 2015 in the Martinsville Daily reports the progress of a bill working its way through the West Virginia Legislature. The new law will allow the use of eminent domain to capture the northern gas fields of West Virginia which are currently owned by private citizens. It will compel forced pooling. The fields have extractable gas 6,000 feet under the surface. If the bill becomes law, the government could eventually take the property. Currently, West Virginia State Law precludes gas companies from drilling wells if… read more

By
Posted in Eminent Domain, Eminent Domain Abuse, Energy, Hydrofracking
Read more > 0

August 28, 2015

New York Law Journal: The Condemnation Expert’s File: Minefield for Cross-Examination

Michael Rikon recently authored a column published in the New York Law Journal titled The Condemnation Expert’s File: Minefield for Cross-Examination. In condemnation cases, each side hires an expert to prepare an opinion on the value of the property. As Mr. Rikon explains in the article, once that expert testifies at trial, his or her work file becomes discoverable by the opposing side, and is often rife with material for cross-examination. This material can range from inaccurate data or the use of a faulty valuation method, to evidence of coaching,… read more

By
Posted in Appraisers, Lawyers, Offer & Compensation, Recent cases, Sandbagging, Trial Preparation, USPAP
Read more > 0

August 24, 2015

Harlem Urban Renewal, the Statute of Limitations, and the Doctrine of Stare Decisis

The Supreme Court, New York County recently issued an interesting  decision by the Hon. Shlomo S. Hagler. The case was in the Matter of City of New York, Fifteenth Amended Harlem-E. Harlem Urban Renewal Plan (East 125th Street), Stage 1. The Decision and Order was issued August 13, 2015 and dealt with several motions by the respondent condemnees, which will be discussed herein. The condemnees collectively included City Lights Properties Three LLC, 2305-07 Third Avenue LLC, 2017 East 125th Street LLC, and 205 East 125th Street LLC. The procedural background of… read more

By
Posted in Challenging condemnation, Condemnation Procedures, Harlem Urban Renewal Project, New York, Recent cases, Statute of Limitations
Read more > 0

August 14, 2015

Blue Island Development, LLC v Town of Hempstead, An Inverse Condemnation

The Appellate Division, Second Department handed down the Blue Island decision on August 12, 2015 (2015 NY Slip Op 06488). The decision can be read by clicking here: Blue Is. Dev., LLC v Town of Hempstead. The decision sets forth an interesting case dealing with a taking claim which arose because of the imposition of a restrictive covenant upon the granting of a zoning change. Blue Island Development acquired a parcel of land which had been used as an oil storage facility. It intended to remediate the environmental contamination and… read more

By
Posted in Eminent Domain, Inverse Condemnation, Zoning
Read more > 0