Rochester & Charlotte Turnpike Road Co. v. Joel
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the plaintiff, The Rochester and Charlotte Turnpike Road Company, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the cleric of the county of Monroe on the 19tli day of November, 1898, upon the decision of the court, rendered after a trial before the court, without a jury, at the Monroe Trial Term, dismissing the complaint upon the merits.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the plaintiff, The Rochester and Charlotte Turnpike Road Company, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the cleric of the county of Monroe on the 19tli day of November, 1898, upon the decision of the court, rendered after a trial before the court, without a jury, at the Monroe Trial Term, dismissing the complaint upon the merits. The plaintiff was incorporated in March, 1880, pursuant to chapter 210 of the Laws of 1847, known as the “ General Turnpike Law.” Its road is nearly five miles in length, and extends from the city of…
1Opinion of the Court
Adams, J.:
The defendant in his answer admits that he passed the plaintiff’s toll gate at the times and in the manner alleged in the complaint, and that he did so with the intent to avoid the payment of toll; but he claims that he was justified in so doing by reason of the provisions of the act of 1.898 (Chap. 151). In opposition to this claim the plaintiff contends that inasmuch as the necessary effect of the act of 1898 was to destroy vested property rights, it was in direct contravention of that principle eriibodied in the fundamental law of both the State *45and nation which declares that no…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Monongahela Navigation Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Stone v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1886
- People v. . O'BrienNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Thorpe v. Rutland & Burlington RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854
- Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co. v. BeckwithSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Hinckley v. Schwarzschild & Sulzberger Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
- Barnes v. ArnoldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Colby v. Equitable Trust Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- Delco Light Co. v. John LeRoy Hutchinson PropertiesSupreme Court of Florida · 1930
- McNulty v. W.& J.SloaneNew York Supreme Court · 1945
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.