Case Name: STILLMAN, v. VILLAGE OF NORTH OLEAN
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1911-01-11
Citations: 126 N.Y.S. 728
Docket Number: 
Parties: STILLMAN, v. VILLAGE OF NORTH OLEAN.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 126
Pages: 728–729

Head Matter:
STILLMAN, v. VILLAGE OF NORTH OLEAN.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth. Department.
January 11, 1911.)
1. Municipal Corporations (§ 399 ) — Street Improvements—Change oe Grade—Damages to Abutting Property—Estoppel.
Where, when a petition for paving a street was presented to the trustees of a village, the plans therefor had not been made, and one signing the petition was told by the trustees that the construction of the pavement would cause no appreciable change in the grade of the street that would damage his property, and signed in reliance on such statement, and it did not appear that the paving could not be done without making so great a change, petitioner was not estopped from claiming damages for changing the grade.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Municipal Corporations, Cent. Dig. §§ 958, 959; Dee. Dig. § 399.*]
2. Municipal Corporations (§ 402*) — Street Improvements—Change oe Grade—Claim por Damages.
Under Village Law (Consol. Laws, c. 64) § 159, requiring a claim against a village for change of grade of a street to be presented within 60 days after such change of grade is effected, where the cutting down of a street and the laying of a brick pavement was one entire piece of work, the change of grade was effected when the work was completed.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Municipal Corporations, Cent. Dig. § 973; Dec. Dig. § 402.*]
Appeal from Special Term, Cattaraugus County.
In the matter of the application of F. V. R. Stillman against the Village of North Olean to determine the compensation to be paid for the change of grade of a street. From the order, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before McLENNAN, P. J., and SPRING, WILLIAMS, KRUSE, and ROBSON,- JJ.
Henry Donnelly, for appellant.
Dana L. Jewell, for respondent.
For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1S07 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
KRUSE, J.
The petitioner and respondent upon this appeal seeks to recover damages to his premises in changing the grade of a street upon which the premises front. The proceeding is brought under section 159 of the village law (Consol. Laws, c. 64).
At the time the grade was changed and the proceedings instituted, the village of North Olean was in existence, and the street in question was one of the streets of that village. By chapter 369, Laws 1908, the village of North Olean was merged in the city of Olean, its territory included within the bounds of the city, and all the liabilities of the village imposed upon the city. The city now contests the claim of the petitioner. The change, of grade seems to have been occasioned by the paving of the street, but the trial judge finds, and the evidence seems to support his conclusion, that the change was not a correction of irregularities existing in the grade before the street was paved, but was a change of the general grade.
It is now contended that, because the petitioner joined in the petition for paving the street, he is estopped from claiming damages for changing the grade. I think not. At the time the petition for paving was made and presented to the trustees of the village, the plans therefor had not been made, and the trial judge finds that the petitioner was told by the trustees that the construction of the pavement would not cause any appreciable change in the grade of the street that would damage his property, and that he signed the petition relying upon that statement. Moreover, it does not appear that the paving of the street could not have been done without making so great a change in the grade as was made, although it is not at all improbable that the best interests of the village as a whole required the cutting of the street and change of grade. Section 159 of the village law empowers a village to change the grade of a street, but provides that:
"If such change of grade shall injuriously affect any building or land adjacent thereto, or the use thereof, the change of grade, to the extent of the damage resulting therefrom, shall be deemed the taking of such adjacent property for a public use."
And it further provides that a claim for damages may be presented within 60 days after such change of grade is effected. It permits the board of trustees to compromise the claim, or, if the claim is not compromised, an application may be made for the appointment of commissioners, as was done in this case. Other provisions relating to the procedure are contained in the act, but they have no relation to the question involved upon this appeal.
There is evidence to sustain the finding that the change in the grade injuriously affected the premises, but, in view of some of the testimony upon the question of damages, it may be proper to suggest that in determining that question the statute requires the commissioners to make an allowance for the benefits, if any, derived by the claimant from the improvement.
The point is made on behalf of the appellant city that the claim was not presented within 60 days after the change of grade was effected. The determination of that question depends upon whether the time for the presentation of the claim commenced to run immediately after the street was cut down or after the brick had been laid and the improvement completed. Until the brick were laid and the improvement completed, the grade could be changed. The cutting down of the street and the laying of the pavement was one entire piece of work, that of paving the street, and I think the change of grade was effected when the work was completed; and so it was held in Phipps v. Village of North Pelham, 61 App. Div. 442, 70 N. Y. Supp. 630.
The order should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.