Archive | Burden of Proof

IT’S TIME TO PUT AN END TO THE BIAS IN FAVOR OF CONDEMNORS

We recently read a decision from the Court of Claims where the following statement is found “… all considered with the understanding that the burden of proof is establishing an entitlement to substantial compensation rests with claimant (see Andrews v State of New York, 137 AD2d 952, 953 (3d Dept).” Cardinal Development Properties, Ltd. v The State of New York, Claim No. 120333, Decision Filed December 18, 2018, J. Hudson. Why would a Court of Claims Judge believe that this is true in a de jure appropriation? In other words,… read more

Posted in Burden of Proof, Condemnation, Inverse Condemnation
Read more > 0

CAREFUL JUDGE – THAT CONDEMNATION IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED

We have written on this subject before, but somehow some judges do not get it.  A condemnation proceeding is not like private litigation.  A condemnation claim is the enforcement of a constitutional mandate that just compensation be paid. Even if the claimant fails in the burden of proof, it is not that he will be non-suited and receive no compensation.  Rather, in this worst-case scenario, the claimant will simply receive the amount proven by the condemnor.  In New York, the burden of proof is on the court to assure that… read more

Posted in Burden of Proof, Offer & Compensation, Trial Preparation
Read more > 0