Which of course brings us back to my initial comment "it's not who ya know, it's who ya..."; on second thought, maybe its who ya know!
Skip Bernstein 732-542-2688 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://JerseyShoreRocks.com http://JerseyShoreGourmet.com Http://JerseyShoreToday.com Http://JerseyShoreWines.com Http://aDogsBreakfast.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "dfsavgny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2005 7:15 PM Subject: [AsburyPark] Re: On the Other Hand... And why not? - main point > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "Skip Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> If we've done nothing else, we've opened an entirely new thread. > > > I hadn't even realized that this happened. This puts things into > greater contrast than ever. Whenever I present comparable sales in a > litigation report, I use certain search parameters (size, location, > sale date, etc.) and in all fairness assume the other side has what > I have in terms of data. I included whatever sales there are within > those parameters whether it helps or hurts my client's perspective. > I bring this up because if you are going to lay out an area for > condemnation (assume for the moment it is for a beneficial public > purpose) you do the same thing; set impersonal and non- > discriminatory parameters. If what you are saying is that certain > homes were exempted from condemnation for no apparent reason other > than who owned them, then there is truly something rotten in the > state of Denmark. > > While not the same thing, something like this (discriminatory) is > going on in Brooklyn with the condemnations for the new Nets arena. > Forest City is paying premiums to certain owners (generally better- > educated white condo and coop owners) to buy them while lowballing > others (generally less well-off financially minorities) and > threatening them with condemnation. In all fairness, I make most of > my living in eminent domain, although I always work for the property > owners. While I can see the need for it at times, being intinately > familar with it, I would not want to be subject to it. It is a > terrible experience. That being said, at minimum the Constitution > requires that the property owner should be in "as good a position > after the taking as before the taking" and the courts have been > struggling with this exact task for over 200 years. The US Supreme > Court may speak further on this in the Kelo case, which reading the > arguments, it appears the court is trying to come to grips with this > question, especially in the context of a "forced sale" which is what > a condemnation amounts to. What I am especially troubled by is that > I discovered that unlike NY, NJ does not provide by statute, for > interest on the difference between the advance payment and the final > condemnation award. > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
