Diocese of Buffalo v. State
300 N.Y.S.2d 328, 24 N.Y.2d 320, 248 N.E.2d 155 (1969)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
In a partial condemnation of cemetery land, the proper measure of damages is the difference between the fair market value of the entire property before the taking and the fair market value of the remainder after the taking (the 'before and after' rule), with both values calculated using the same income-capitalization method.
Facts:
- The Diocese of Buffalo, Buffalo Burial Park Association, and St. Stanislaus Roman Catholic Church Society each owned and operated cemeteries in New York.
- The State of New York, exercising its power of eminent domain, appropriated a portion of the undeveloped land from each of the three cemeteries for public use.
- For the Diocese of Buffalo, this taking resulted in the loss of 3,500 potential grave sites from its total inventory.
- For the Buffalo Burial Park Association, the taking resulted in the loss of 30,405 potential grave sites from its total inventory.
- The Buffalo Burial Park Association had also planted 5,000 pine trees for nursery purposes in an undeveloped section of its land, which were destroyed by the state's appropriation.
- The land taken from each cemetery was part of a larger inventory of fungible, undeveloped plots intended for future sale over many years.
Procedural Posture:
- The Diocese of Buffalo, Buffalo Burial Park Association, and St. Stanislaus Roman Catholic Church Society each filed claims in the New York Court of Claims (a trial-level court) seeking compensation for the partial taking of their lands by the State of New York.
- The Court of Claims awarded damages in each case by calculating an average value per grave site and multiplying that average by the number of sites appropriated.
- The State of New York, as appellant, appealed the awards to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court (an intermediate appellate court).
- The Appellate Division affirmed the judgments of the Court of Claims in each case.
- The State of New York was granted permission to appeal to the Court of Appeals of New York, the state's highest court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
In a partial taking of cemetery land, is the proper measure of damages the number of grave sites taken multiplied by an average per-site value?
Opinions:
Majority - Chief Judge Fuld
No. The proper measure of damages in a partial taking of cemetery land is the application of the 'before and after' rule, not a multiplication of an average unit value. The general rule in partial taking cases—the difference between the value of the whole before the taking and the value of the remainder after—applies to cemetery lands. The court reasoned that the 'St. Agnes' case established a method for valuation (the annuity or income-capitalization method), not the measure of damages. The economic effect of taking fungible grave sites is not the loss of specific plots but the shortening of the cemetery's economic life. The lower court's 'averaging' method created a windfall by failing to account for the fact that the lost sales would have occurred at the very end of the cemetery's life, and the present value of that deferred income is much lower than an 'average' plot value. The 'before and after' rule, using the St. Agnes valuation method for both calculations, accurately reflects the claimant's actual loss, which is equivalent to losing the final years of an annuity.
Dissenting - Judge Burke
Yes. The 'average value' method, derived from the St. Agnes case, provides just compensation and should have been affirmed. The majority's approach creates a 'bizarre offspring' by improperly wedding the special valuation rule for cemeteries with the standard 'before and after' rule. This new method arbitrarily assumes the taken plots would be the very last ones sold, thereby valuing them at their lowest possible present value and creating a windfall for the State. The previously accepted 'averaging' approach was a fair middle ground ('via media') that acknowledged the uncertainty of when any particular plot would be sold. The majority's rule will result in awards that are 'shockingly less than just' compensation and represents an unfair departure from established precedent.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the 'before and after' rule as the mandatory method for calculating damages in partial takings of special-use properties like cemeteries, which generate income over extended periods. It integrates the specialized 'St. Agnes' annuity valuation method into the traditional 'before and after' framework, creating a specific two-step process. The ruling effectively rejects simpler 'per-unit' averaging methods, which will likely result in lower condemnation awards in similar future cases because the loss is measured by the least valuable, most deferred portion of the income stream rather than an average.
