Diocese of Buffalo v. State of New York
New York Court of Appeals
248 N.E.2d 155, 24 NY.2d 320, 300 N.Y.S.2d 328 (1969)
- Written by David Bloom, JD
Facts
Condemnation proceedings were held by the court to determine the appropriate measure of damages owed to the Diocese of Buffalo (Diocese) (plaintiff) after the State of New York (the state) (defendant) partially took the Diocese’s cemetery land. The parcel of land that the state took over had 3,500 grave sites out of a total of 65,450 grave sites owned by the Diocese. The court estimated that for the Diocese to sell the 65,450 total grave sites at a rate of 1,190 grave sites per year would have taken 55 years. Based on these estimates, the court figured that selling the 3,500 grave sites on the parcel of land taken by the state would take approximately three years. The entire property’s value before the taking was estimated to be $1,870,462.33, so the average value of each grave site was $28.58. After multiplying the average value of each grave site by 3,500, the court awarded the Diocese $100,030.00 in damages for the partial taking of the cemetery land. The state appealed, arguing that the court incorrectly calculated the damages because the court failed to consider the value of the Diocese’s remaining land after the state’s partial taking, which equaled $1,855,354.77. According to the state, the court should have awarded the Diocese only $15,107.56, or the difference between the value of the entire property before the taking and the value of the remainder of the property after the taking.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fuld, C.J.)
Dissent (Burke, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.