Our hat is off to our colleague on the Prawsblog of June 2, 2020, who commenting on the two battling New York state eminent domain decisions (Kaur and Goldstein cases), observed:
“But the doctrinal battle between the appellate division [in the Kaur case] and the Court of Appeals [in the Goldstein case] really is rooted in empty, incoherent blather that can never be a satisfying basis for a doctrine. ‘Blight’ is an epithet in search of a definition, while ‘public use’ is either merely a requirement of public benefit (in which case, it is judicially unmanageable) or a requirement of public title (in which case, it is a perverse encouragement of statist inefficiency).”
Well said.
For our take on the Kaur case (that was just argued in the New York Court of Appeals) go to https://gideonstrumpet.info/?p=449