Jacquemin v. Finnegan
New York County Courts
Appeal from a judgment rendered in justice’s conit of the city of Utica, in an action in which the plaintiff claims the defendant has appropriated and converted certain curbing stone, which the plaintiff alleges is his property. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Smith, J. E., J.
On February 16, 1881, the plaintiff, by a conveyance to him, became the owner of a lot on the north side of Bleecker street, in the city of Utica, in his deed bounded as fol*629lows: “ Commencing at a point on the northerly side of Bleecker street, ten feet west of the east line of lot Ho. 22, in block 19, as the same is designated on a map made by Charles 0. Broadhead, surveyor, in the year 1810, for the representative of' Rutger Bleecker, deceased, which map is on file in the clerk’s office of said county, and running thence at right angles with Bleecker Street northerly 120…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Jackson ex dem. Yates v. HathawayNew York Supreme Court · 1818
- Kings County Fire Ins. Co. v. . StevensNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Halsey v. . McCormickNew York Court of Appeals · 1855
- Robert v. . SadlerNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Denniston v. ClarkMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Feldhake v. City of Santa FeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1956
- Bailey v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1912
- Hoefer v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1913
- Nelson v. City of WillmarSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1937