Legal Opinion · Dissent

Friedman v. Snare & Triest Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 19, 1905Published

On error to the Supreme Court.

1DissentFort, J.

I am unable to agree with the result reached by the majority of the court in this case.

It may be conceded that the abutting owner, whose land abuts upon a public highway, if no other fact appears, owns to the middle of the street. But such ownership is, of course, subject to public user, and the public rights are, as I think, exclusive of any right of the abutting owner in the highway which is inconsistent with the public right. All parts of the street, from side to side and end to end, are for the public use in appropriate and proper methods, and not for permanent private use. A temporary…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Powers v. HarlowMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
  2. Callanan v. . GilmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
  3. People v. CunninghamCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
  4. Kunz v. . City of TroyNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
  5. City of Chicago v. KeefeIllinois Supreme Court · 1885

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API