Batterman v. City of New York
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Cross-appeals by the plaintiff, Henry Batterman, and by the defendant, The City of New York, from a judgment of the Supreme Court, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 11th day of December, 1900, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial at the Kings County Special Term.
Read the full summary
Cross-appeals by the plaintiff, Henry Batterman, and by the defendant, The City of New York, from a judgment of the Supreme Court, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 11th day of December, 1900, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial at the Kings County Special Term. These are cross-appeals from a judgment of the Special Term in an action brought to declare the annual water rates assessed against certain cemetery property in the city of Brooklyn for the years 1886 to 1897, inclusive, null and void, and to discharge them as a lien or cloud upon the…
1Opinion of the Court
Jenks, J.:
I understand that the defendant now virtually abandons its appeal by the concession that the water rates levied upon the cemetery in 1886 and 1887 were void in that the act neither provided for notice nor afforded hearing, and so was unconstitutional. Section 10 of chapter 138 of the Laws of 1847, as amended by chapter 31 of the Laws of 1877, the amendment being included in brackets, provides : “ The cemetery lands and property of any association formed pursuant to this act [and any property held in trust by it for any of the purposes mentioned in section nine of this act] shall be…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Norwood v. BakerSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Illinois Central Railroad v. DecaturSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Parsons v. District of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Hassan v. . City of RochesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- In re the Mayor of New-YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1814
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Chapman v. City of AlbuquerqueNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1959
- New York Cardiac Center, Inc. v. KondzielaskiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981