Matter of Rochester Urban Renewal Agency v. Patchen Post, Inc., 45 N.Y.2d 1 (1978)
An appraisal used by a governmental entity to obtain funding can be admitted as evidence of value, but its consideration on appeal is improper if it was not properly admitted into evidence at the trial level.
Summary
This case concerns the admissibility of an appraisal used by the State to obtain federal highway funding (the Pomeroy appraisal) as evidence of damages in a condemnation proceeding. The Court of Claims initially failed to consider the appraisal due to an oversight. Although it later acknowledged the oversight, it refused to consider the appraisal as evidence of value. The Appellate Division vacated the Court of Claims decision but then improperly awarded damages based on the appraisal. The Court of Appeals held that while the appraisal could be admitted as evidence, the Appellate Division erred in considering it because it was not properly admitted at trial. The case was remitted for further proceedings.
Facts
The Rochester Urban Renewal Agency sought to condemn property owned by Patchen Post, Inc. to be used for highway construction. The State had used an appraisal (the Pomeroy appraisal) to obtain federal highway funding for the project. During the trial at the Court of Claims to determine the property’s value, the Pomeroy appraisal figure was received in evidence. However, the Court of Claims initially failed to consider the appraisal in its determination of damages. The claimants moved to vacate the decision or for a new trial, arguing that the Court of Claims erred in not considering the Pomeroy appraisal.
Procedural History
The Court of Claims initially failed to consider the Pomeroy appraisal in determining damages. The Appellate Division reversed the Court of Claims’ decision and granted the claimant’s cross-motion to vacate the earlier decision. The Appellate Division then awarded the claimants $45,150 based on the Pomeroy appraisal. The State appealed, and the claimants cross-appealed. The Court of Appeals modified the Appellate Division’s order, reversed the damage award, and remitted the case to the Appellate Division for further proceedings.
Issue(s)
Whether the Appellate Division erred in awarding damages based on an appraisal (the Pomeroy appraisal) that was used by the State to obtain federal highway funding, when that appraisal was not formally marked as an exhibit nor fully admitted into evidence at the trial level.
Holding
Yes, because the Appellate Division’s consideration of the appraisal, which was not properly admitted into evidence, constituted error. The appraisal figure was received solely as an admission, and not as a full exhibit.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals reasoned that the Court of Claims erred in failing to give consideration to the damages evidence contained in the Pomeroy appraisal. The court acknowledged that the appraisal figure was received in evidence. The court stated, “The Court of Claims erroneously failed to give any consideration to evidence of damages contained in an appraisal used by the State to obtain Federal highway funding, known as the Pomeroy appraisal, which figure was received in evidence.”
However, the Court of Appeals also determined that the Appellate Division erred in awarding damages based on the appraisal because it had not been formally admitted into evidence. The court noted, “However, the Appellate Division improperly awarded claimants $45,150. The Pomeroy appraisal was neither marked as an exhibit nor received in evidence. The value stated in it was received solely as an admission. Consideration of the appraisal by the Appellate Division thus constituted error (see Kirby v Mafox Realty Corp., 272 App Div 889) and the matter should be remitted to the Appellate Division for further proceedings.”
The court distinguished between receiving a figure from the appraisal as an admission versus admitting the entire appraisal as an exhibit. Because the full appraisal was not properly admitted, the Appellate Division’s reliance on it to determine the damage award was improper.