1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.3d
  4. 108 A.D.3d
  5. 108 A.D.3d 1 (2013)
 

REED FOUND. v. ROOSEVELT PARK

9656.

108 A.D.3d 1 (2013)

964 N.Y.S.2d 152

2013 NY Slip Op 3191

In the Matter of THE REED FOUNDATION, INC., Respondent, v. FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT FOUR FREEDOMS PARK, LLC, Appellant.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.

Decided May 2, 2013.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Sidley Austin LLP, New York City ( James D. Zirin , James D. Arden and Michael D. Mann of counsel), for appellant.

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, New York City ( Michael J. Garvey and Devin F. Ryan of counsel), for respondent.

TOM, J.P., SAXE, FREEDMAN and FEINMAN, JJ., concur.

OPINION OF THE COURT

ACOSTA, J.

Can aesthetic considerations trump a carefully considered and crafted contractual provision dictating the specific location of an inscription on a work of art? We hold that they cannot.

This case revolves around the Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) Four Freedoms Park (the Park), which commemorates FDR's famous "Four Freedoms" speech.* The Park is located on four acres of land at the southern...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases