Rome, Watertown & Ogdensburgh Railroad v. Smith
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order denying a motion to continue an injunction and vacating the injunction previously granted.
1Concurrence
Davis, P. J.:
While I concur in the views expressed by my brother Daniels, touching the validity and sufficiency of both of the oaths taken by the assessors and annexed to the respective assessment-rolls, and in the opinion that if the first was in any respect illegal or irregular all error was cured by the making of the second oath, which was a literal compliance with the requirement of the act of 1885, yet I think prominence should also be given to the grounds upon which the continuance of the injunctions were denied by the court at Special Term. Those grounds were expressed in the opinion…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Heywood v. . the City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1856
- Guest v. . the City of BrooklynNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Bouton v. City of BrooklynNew York Supreme Court · 1853
- Messeck v. Board of SupervisorsNew York Supreme Court · 1867
- Howell v. City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.