York 2 Broadway Co. v. Produce Exch. Realty Trust, 93 A.D.2d 465, 462 N.Y.S.2d 456, 458 (N.Y.App.Div.1983) (“By ... specifically providing that the value of the land was to be considered as vacant and unimproved, the parties manifested a clear intention that existing structures, encumbrances and leases not be taken into account in fixing value.”); Bullock’s, Inc. v. Security-First Nat’l Bank of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 277, 325 P.2d 185, 191 (1958) (“While rental income is normally a proper factor to be considered in determining the value of property, it obviously cannot be considered when property is being appraised for the very purpose of determining the rent which should be paid.”); Schipper & Block, Inc., v. Carson Pirie Scott & Co., 122 Ill.App.2d 34, 256 N.E.2d 854, 860 (1970) (<HOLDING>). Further, reliance upon Missouri Baptist is
holding a company which is responsible for tendering into the market a drug which it knows or should know is so dangerous that it should not be taken by anyone can be said to have violated its duty of care either in design or marketing holding that an appraiser should not have taken into consideration as a depreciating factor the influence of the lease itself which required reappraisals every ten years as to do so is improper and unfair to the lessor holding that under the circumstances the deception was so unfair as to be coercive holding the alj does not have to specifically refer to every piece of evidence so long as the decision is not a broad rejection that is insufficient to permit a court to conclude that the alj considered the claimants medical condition as a whole holding that a statement that the jurors were not required to reach a verdict but should try to do so was not coercive