US-New York

Can I challenge a condemnation as not being for a public use?

30 days

Appeal deadline

Eminent Domain

Legal process

Art. I, § 7

NY Constitution

CPLR 78

Challenge procedure

The Short Answer

Yes, you can challenge a condemnation in New York if you believe it is not for a 'public use' — courts review whether the taking serves a legitimate public purpose, though deference is given to the condemning authority's determination.

What the Law Says

New York’s Constitution and statutes set strict limits on when government may take private property — requiring that any taking be for a 'public use.' Courts examine whether the stated purpose meets constitutional standards, though they generally defer to legislative findings unless clearly arbitrary.

The New York State Constitution prohibits the taking of private property without just compensation and requires that any taking be 'for public use.' This is found in Article I, Section 7: 'Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.'

New York’s Eminent Domain Procedure Law (EDPL) governs how condemnations are carried out. While EDPL does not define 'public use' itself, it authorizes condemnations only where the project serves a public purpose — and courts interpret that term in light of constitutional requirements.

A condemning agency must state the public use in its petition. If a property owner believes the stated use is pretextual or fails to serve the public, they may object before the acquisition is finalized — or challenge it afterward via an Article 78 proceeding.

Statutory Text
Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.
— N.Y. Const. art. I, § 7 — Eminent Domain Clause

What Courts Have Said

New York courts apply a functional, fact-sensitive test to determine whether a taking qualifies as 'public use,' rejecting purely formal labels and examining actual use, control, and benefit to the public.

Kelo v. City of New London

U.S. Supreme Court · 2005

While not a NY case, Kelo influenced NY courts to scrutinize economic development takings more closely; NY later enacted reforms limiting such uses.

Goldstein v. New York State Urban Development Corp.

N.Y. Court of Appeals · 2007

Upheld condemnation for Atlantic Yards redevelopment, holding that 'public use' includes projects with mixed public-private benefits if there is substantial public oversight and benefit.

Didden v. Village of Port Chester

2d Cir. · 2006

Applied rational basis review but emphasized that pretextual takings — e.g., to benefit a private developer after a dispute — violate due process and public use requirements.

What to Do

File a written objection to the condemning authority before the public hearing or within the time specified in the notice (often 30 days).

If the taking proceeds, commence an Article 78 proceeding within 4 months of the final determination to challenge the public use finding.

Gather evidence showing lack of genuine public benefit — e.g., no public access, minimal oversight, or primary benefit to a private party.

Consult an attorney experienced in eminent domain — challenges require precise legal arguments and timely filings.

Sources

statuteN.Y. Const. art. I, § 7 — Eminent Domain Clause statuteN.Y. Eminent Domain Procedure Law (EDPL)caseKelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005)caseGoldstein v. New York State Urban Development Corp., 13 N.Y.3d 511 (2009)caseDidden v. Village of Port Chester, 406 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006)

Same Question, Other Jurisdictions

US-California Compare all →

Not legal advice. This article is general information based on publicly available sources, written for educational purposes. Laws change and individual situations vary. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before acting on anything you read here. Last reviewed: 2026-06-08.