People v. . Underhill
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the general term of the supreme court in the second judicial department, entered upon am order, which affirmed a judgment convicting defendants upon am indictment for maintaining a nuisance in obstructing a highway, entered upon a verdict of the court of sessions of Westchester county. Prior to 1859 the state of New York was the owner of a certain parcel-of land in the village of Sing Sing, known as the prison or state farm.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the general term of the supreme court in the second judicial department, entered upon am order, which affirmed a judgment convicting defendants upon am indictment for maintaining a nuisance in obstructing a highway, entered upon a verdict of the court of sessions of Westchester county. Prior to 1859 the state of New York was the owner of a certain parcel-of land in the village of Sing Sing, known as the prison or state farm. In that year the legislature passed am act providing for its sale by tbe inspectors of state prisons. Pursuant to that authority the inspectors…
1Opinion of the CourtPeckham, J.
In the view we take of this case it will not be necessary to determine whether the state prison inspectors could legally have laid out by dedication on the part of the state a public highway through the land which they were authorized to sell for the state. They assumed to do so, and in the map filed by them this so-called Lafayette avenue is laid out. In their deed to Nelson and others they expressly reserve the right of way over the land designated on the map as new streets and dedicate such land to the public as a public highway, for the benefit of the public and for the owner and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Speir v. . Town of New UtrechtNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Holdane v. . Trustees of the Village of Cold SpringNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Lord v. . AtkinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Hennessy v. . MurdockNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Niagara Falls Suspension Bridge Co. v. BachmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by46 opinions
- Palmer v. . PalmerNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Dickinson v. Arkansas City Improvement Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
- Haight v. . LittlefieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- Smith v. . SmytheNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
- People v. SutherlandNew York Court of Appeals · 1929
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.