Cheney v. Syracuse, Ontario & New York Railroad
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Judgment affirmed, with costs on the opinion of Vann, J., delivered at Special Term, and upon Wright v. Syracuse, Ontario & New York Railroad Co. (92 Hun, 32).—The following is the opinion of Vann, J.:
1Opinion of the Court
Vann, J.:
The principle upon which the court has based its judgment in this case is the same as was laid down in Mayock v. The Rome, Watertown & Ogdensburg R, R. Co ,decided in March, 1893, and the features common to the two cases will not be reconsidered. The letters patent, dated May 11, 1832, when considered in connection with the map to which they refer, which has been sufficiently identified, establish a conveyance by the People to a remote grantor of the plaintiffs of a lot of land, in effect described as abutting upon a street, without any reservation. or declaration of intention not to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bissell v. . the New York Central R.R. CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
- Galway v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Newman v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1890
- A.B.N. Co. v. . N.Y.E.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1892
3Cited by5 opinions
- City of Albany v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1971
- Paige v. Schenectady Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902
- Gere v. McChesneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
- City of Albany v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1970
- Gere v. McChesneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903