In re Village of Waverly
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the Waverly and State Line Railway Company and its lessee, the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, and the Erie Railroad Company, from orders of the Supreme Court, made at the Che-mung Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Tioga on the 25th day of March, 1898, granting the applicant’s motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus compelling the said railroad companies to lay out a street across the tracks of said companies in the village of…
Read the full summary
Appeal by the Waverly and State Line Railway Company and its lessee, the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, and the Erie Railroad Company, from orders of the Supreme Court, made at the Che-mung Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Tioga on the 25th day of March, 1898, granting the applicant’s motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus compelling the said railroad companies to lay out a street across the tracks of said companies in the village of Waverly. These are appeals from orders directing the issuance of a peremptory mandamus against the appellants and…
1Opinion of the Court
Herrick, J.:
At the time of the presentation of the petition to the board of trustees of the village of Waverly, for the extension and laying out of Spaulding street across the defendants’ tracks, chapter 62 of the-Laws of 1853 was in full force and effect. That statute provided that it should 'be lawful for the authorities of any city, village or town to lay out streets or highways across the tracks of any railroad without compensation to the corporation owning such railroad, and that, after receiving notice thereof, it should be the duty of any railroad corporation, across whose tracks a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Lunney v. . CampbellNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- People Ex Rel. Slavin v. . WendellNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- People ex rel. Hackley v. Croton Aqueduct BoardNew York Supreme Court · 1867
- People ex rel. City of Niagara Falls v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
3Cited by7 opinions
- Peo. Ex Rel. v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1899
- In re BurkeNew York Supreme Court · 1912
- People ex rel. City of Niagara Falls v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- In re SchuylerNew York Supreme Court · 1930
- In re RossNew York Supreme Court · 1919
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.