Legal Opinion
Parker v. Oswego Construction Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided April 15, 1913PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Demurrer on the ground that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
1Opinion of the CourtAndrews, J.
The complaint shows that there existed a bridge extending westerly from a public highway in the city of Fulton across the Oswego canal and then *296across an arm of the Oswego river to an island in the said river. This island was occupied by the Fulton Light, Heat and Power Company. The bridge in question was the property of the state of New York and had been for over thirty years used by the public.
The defendant was engaged in making excavations for the barge canal between the bed of the Oswego river and the Oswego canal at Fulton. In the performance of this work it, without the right so to do,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Nicholson v. . the Erie Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1870
- Fox v. . Warner-Quinlan Asphalt Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1912
- Commonwealth Electric Co. v. MelvilleIllinois Supreme Court · 1904
- Murphy v. . City of BrooklynNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
3Cited by3 opinions
- Conner v. East Bay Municipal Utility DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Cramer v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., New York County Courts1965
- Conner v. East Bay Municipal Utility DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935