TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re the City of New York

In the Matter of the City of New York, Relative to Acquiring Title to Real Property for a Project Known as 43 West Side Urban Renewal Area in the Borough of Manhattan. Edward Mongeon

In re the City of N.Y., 42 A.D.2d 551 (1973)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
June 26, 1973
Citations
42 A.D.2d 551346 N.Y.S.2d 5031973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4059

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on March 27, 1973, denying petitioner’s application for an order of possession, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs and without disbursements, and the petition granted. The caution demonstrated by Special Term, in denying the application without prejudice to renewal after, resubmission to the Board of Estimate, now appears unnecessary in view of the announcement by the Secretary of Housing and *552 Urban Development, on or about May 7, 1973, to the effect that the specific project involved herein will receive funding pursuant to section 236 of the National Housing Act of 1949 (62 U. S. Stat. 413), irrespective of the freeze on such funding announced by the Federal Government earlier this year. In any event, we would reverse, even if the Secretary of HUD had not acted, as above indicated, as a freeze on 236 funding, on this record, would be but a nonessential change. (See Margulis v. Lindsay, 31 N Y 2d 167, 173.) The record below indicates a strong likelihood of funds being available and, more important, it indicates that the Board of Estimate had considered the possibility of a freeze prior to adopting its resolution on December 21, 1972. Settle order on notice. Concur — Markewich, J. P., Nunez, Lane, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list