Hutchins v. Smith
New York Supreme Court
THIS is an action to recover damages and for an injunction to restrain the continuance of an alleged nuisance, caused by operating lime kilns in Fayettville.
1Opinion of the CourtHardin, J.
To maintain an action to abate a nuisance, since the remedy is by action and not by writ, the plaintiff must allege that he was the owner of the freehold affected by the nuisance at the time when the several acts complained of were committed; and the action must be against the owners in fee, in cases where it is brought to abate the nuisance. (1 N. Y. 223. 5 Barb. 550. 16 id. 568. 24 id. 404. 29 id. 391. 12 N. Y. 486.) By section 453 of the Code, the writ of nuisance is abolished, and by section 454 it is provided that “ injuries heretofore remediable by writ of nuisance are subjects of…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Hay v. . the Cohoes CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1849
- Fish v. DodgeNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- Mohawk Bridge Co. v. Utica & Schenectady Rail RoadNew York Court of Chancery · 1837
- Catlin v. ValentineNew York Court of Chancery · 1842
- Brown v. . the Cayuga and Susquehanna Railroad Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1855
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- City of Rochester v. MacAuley-fien Milling Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1910
- Olmsted v. RichNew York Supreme Court · 1889
- Yocum v. Hotel St. George Co.New York Supreme Court · 1887
- Armbruster v. Auburn Gas Light Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
- Purton v. WatsonCity of New York Municipal Court · 1888
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.