Legal Opinion

City of Schenectady v. Schenectady Railway Co.

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1922PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Motion to vacate a preliminary injunction.

1Opinion of the CourtBorst, J.

The plaintiff is a city of the second class and subject to the provisions of uniform charters of second-class cities. The defendant is a street railway corporation. An ordinance recently enacted by the city provides that “ Every car or other vehicle running upon a street railway track or tracks, and operated by electricity or otherwise, on which passengers are carried, shall be manned by both a motorman and a conductor * * * in order to secure the convenience and safety of the public in the operation of said cars.” The defendant recently has commenced operating what are known as “ one-man…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. People v. MorrisNew York Supreme Court · 1835
  2. South Covington & Cincinnati Street Railway Co. v. BerryCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1892
  3. People Ex Rel. C.P., Etc., R.R. Co. v. . WillcoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
  4. People Ex Rel. Ross v. . City of BrooklynNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
  5. City of Troy v. . United Traction Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1911

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Des Moines City Railway Co. v. Amalgamated Ass'n of Street & Electric Railway EmployeesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1927
  2. Third Avenue Railway Co. v. GodleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API