No. 11-922I
N
THE
Supreme Court of the United States
O
N
P
ETITION
FOR
A
W
RIT
OF
C
ERTIORARI
TO
THE
A
PPELLATE
D
IVISION
, S
UPREME
C
OURT
OF
N
EW
Y
ORK
,F
IRST
J
UDICIAL
D
EPARTMENT
A
(800) 274-3321 • (800) 359-6859
RIVER CENTER LLC,
Petitioner,v.
DORMITORY AUTHORITYOF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
Respondent.
BRIEF IN OPPOSITION
241027
C
HARLES
S. W
EBB
III
Counsel of Record
B
ERGER
& W
EBB
, LLP7 Times SquareNew York, NY 10036(212) 319-1900cwebb@bergerwebb.com
Counsel for Respondent
i
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
1. Does this Court have jurisdiction over Petitioner’sFifth Amendment claims where such claims were notpresented to or addressed by the state courts below?2. Does the Fifth Amendment require a court to value a property as if it were fully developed where thetrial court, after weighing the evidence, determines thata condemnee’s particular development efforts as of thedate of condemnation added little value to the property?3. Does the Fifth Amendment require that a claim bya condemnee for increased damages as a result of a delayin the property’s rezoning be heard in a condemnationproceeding where the value achieved by the rezoning was credited by the appraisals and the claim is pendingin another proceeding?4. Should the trial court’s evidentiary rulingsconcerning evidence of the property’s value be reviewedby this Court where the court properly applied state law, which conformed with the Fifth Amendment?
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
QUESTIONS PRESENTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iTABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iiTABLE OF CITED AUTHORITIES . . . . . . . . . . . ivINTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1STATEMENT OF THE CASE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3The Delay Damages Claim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4The Condemnation Valuation Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Appeal to the Appellate Division . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10THE PETITION SHOULD BE DENIED. . . . . . . 12 A. This Court Lacks Jurisdiction BecauseNo Substantial Federal Question WasRaised in the State Courts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12B. The Decision Is Based Upon Independentand Adequate State Grounds andInvolves Factual Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15C. The Decision Does Not Conflict WithDecisions of this Court or Other Courts . . . 16
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Brief in Opposition, River Center LLC v. Dormitory Auth. of the State of New York, No. 11-922 (filed Mar. 26, 2012) 11 922 BIO
400
Reads
0
Readcasts
4.3K
Embed Views
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
