•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This Article analyzes the New York cases of Kaur v. New York State Urban Development Corp. and Goldstein v. New York State Urban Development Corp. and asserts that the New York Court of Appeals erred in allowing such an expansive definition of "blight" and defining pretextual takings too narrowly. Part I Describes the two cases. Part II explains the concept of blight condemnation and how it was used in the two cases. Part III discusses how the two cases treat the federal constitutional standard for pretextual takings. The Article concludes that eminent domain reform requires a narrower definition of "blight" and constraints on corrupt designation practices.

Share

COinS
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.