« In Queens, a major affordable housing project involves multiple sites and competitive bidding | Main | Second look at Columbia eminent domain argument, with FAQ; will bad faith claim be the key? Also, law professors debate public use, land assembly »
June 8, 2010
Overriding Broad Public Use in the Face of Bad Faith Blight: In re Parminder Kaur and Redeveloping Eminent Domain in New York State
Albany Government Law Review Fireplace
By Robert Barrows
Here is a look at the eminent case recently heard by the New York State Court of Appeals. The ESDC is trying to claim Manhattanville is blighted so as to justify the use of eminent domain, but ESDC claims of blight seem to have been manufactured, not so differently from the ESDC claiming blight in a Prospect Heights neighborhood that has million-dollar condos.
The conclusion indicates that the Court could rule against the ESDC if it considers the Kaskel exception where "“the physical conditions of an area might be such that it would be irrational and baseless to call it substandard or insanitary.”
The taking of Manhattanville appears to be, on its face, manufactured and so ostentatious that the Kaskel exception could come into play. Much of the ire of the First Department’s opinion was directed at the ESDC’s process for making its determination and the court placed strong importance on timing and procedure in the exercise of eminent domain – a theme that perhaps will continue on appeal. More importantly, given the current public outrage and uncertainty surrounding the law of eminent domain, employing a long invoked exception that places a check against engineered pretenses to justify a taking would perhaps be a sensible solution. With In re Parminder Kaur v. N.Y.S. Development Corp., the use of the hypothetical exception illustrated in Kaskel may be justified.
Posted by steve at June 8, 2010 8:42 AM