Mayor v. Second Avenue Railroad
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from j udgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made December 31, 1883, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff directed by the court.' (Reported below, 31 Hun, 241.) This action was brought to recover damages for an alleged breach of contract.
Read the full summary
Appeal from j udgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made December 31, 1883, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff directed by the court.' (Reported below, 31 Hun, 241.) This action was brought to recover damages for an alleged breach of contract. Defendant, having obtained permission to lay its railroad with a double track over portions of certain streets in the city of Hew York, entered into a contract with the city by which it' covenanted among other things “ that the said company shall pave the streets in and…
1Opinion of the CourtAndrews, J.
The construction of the covenant of the defendant, the Second Avenue Railroad Company, contained in *576the instrument of December 15, 1852, to pave the streets “ in and about the rails ” in a permanent manner, and to “ keep the same in repair to the satisfaction of the street commissioners,” was considered in the case of McMahon v. Second Ave. R. R. Co. (75 N. Y. 231), and it was held that the covenant bound the company to pave and keep in repair so much of the space between the tracks as was disturbed in the original construction of the road. Upon this construction of the covenant, the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Halsey v. . SinsebaughNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- McMahon v. . Second Avenue Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Peck v. . ValentineNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Highway Commissioners of Rutland v. Highway Commissioners of DaytonIllinois Supreme Court · 1871
- Payne v. . HodgeNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
3Cited by8 opinions
- Chisholm v. Beaman Machine Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1895
- Hay v. PetersonWyoming Supreme Court · 1896
- Mastan Company v. American Custom Homes, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1968
- Manchester Assur. Co. v. Oregon RailroadOregon Supreme Court · 1905
- Bloomington Mining Co. v. Brooklyn Hygienic Ice Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.