Cameron v. New York Elevated Railroad
New York Supreme Court
Motion upon the judge’s minutes to set aside the verdict herein, and -for a new trial on the ground that the same is ¡contrary to the evidence and contrary to law; also, because fh© verdict is excessive. Also, separate and special motion to set aside so much of the verdict as awards damages for injury to rental value subsequent to the commencement of the action.
1Opinion of the CourtWerner, J.
This action was commenced on the 8th day of December, 1890. It was brought to restrain the defendants from maintaining, constructing or operating their ¡elevated railroad or any part thereof in front of and adjoining the premises owned by plaintiff and known as No. 130 Ninth avenue in the city of New York and incidentally to recover damages for the injury to the rental value of plaintiff’s premises caused by the construction, maintenance and operation of defendants’ said. railroad. The plaintiff acquired the title to said premises September, 1890, and retained the same until the 4th day of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Pegram v. New York Elevated RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- McGean v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Van Allen v. New York Elevated RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Domschke v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.New York Supreme Court · 1893
3Cited by2 opinions
- Pope v. Manhattan Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
- Pope v. Manhattan Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903