42 Misc. 2d 1021 - Rymkevitch v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Certainly, temporary interference with access or noise, dirt, mud, and blasting vibration is not such an interference as to permanently diminish the value of the remaining property. As was stated in Farrell v. Rose, 253 N.Y. 73, 76 , 170 N.E. 498, 499 , 68 A.L.R. 1505 : “ ‘The inconvenience and damage which a property owner suffers from these temporary obstructions are incident to city life and must be endured. The law gives him no right to relief, recognizing that he recoups his damage in the benefit which he shares with the general public in the ultimate improvement which is being made. The law, however, does afford him a relief, if the city or a contractor interferes with the highway without authority; or, if acting legally, prolongs the work unnecessarily or unreasonably.’ See also, Reis v. City of New York, 188 N.Y. 58, 69 , 80 N.E. 573 ; Queensboro Farm Products, Inc. v. State of New York, 5 A.D.2d 967 , 171 N.Y.S.2d 646 , aff’d 5 N.Y.2d 977 , 184 N.Y.S.2d 844 , 157 N.E.2d 719 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State Ex Rel. State Highway Department v. Kistler-Collister Co.