Court Opinion

ID: 5805795
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-12 18:37:01.193659+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:42:42.796427
License: Public Domain

Catterson, J.,
concurs in a separate memorandum as follows: In my view, the record amply demonstrates that the neighbor*437hood in question is not blighted, that whatever blight exists is due to the actions of the City and/or is located far outside the project area, and that the justification of underutilization is nothing but a canard to aid in the transfer of private property to a developer. Unfortunately for the rights of the citizens affected by the proposed condemnation, the recent rulings of the Court of Appeals in Matter of Goldstein v New York State Urban Dev. Corp. (13 NY3d 511 [2009]) and Matter of Kaur v New York State Urban Dev. Corp. (15 NY3d 235 [2010]) have made plain that there is no longer any judicial oversight of eminent domain proceedings. Thus, I am compelled to concur with the majority.