Court Opinion

ID: 9788175
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 00:32:01.999799+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:05.501034
License: Public Domain

Memorandum : The trial court has found as a fact and the Appellate Division affirmed that the appropriation of the subject property for the construction of a power line was not con*608templated by the original project, which was enlarged to include that purpose only after the project was well under way. The valuation of the property for that purpose included an element of value enhanced by the existence of the original project, but under the ruling in United States v. Miller (317 U. S. 369) this is to be compensated where, as here, the project is subsequently enlarged by the construction of transmission lines, in which event the Miller case requires payment of the market price as enhanced by the factor of proximity to the public improvement. For this and other reasons stated in the opinions below, the judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.