Hudson River Bridge Co. v. Patterson
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendant, entered upon the report of a referee. The referee found that plaintiff was a corporation duly created and organized by and under an act of the legislature of this State, passed April 9, 1856 (chap. 146, Laws of 1856); that under the authority conferred by said act, plaintiff had acquired title to lands in the town of Greenbush, in the county of Rensselaer', and had erected a bridge over and across the Hudson river, the…
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendant, entered upon the report of a referee. The referee found that plaintiff was a corporation duly created and organized by and under an act of the legislature of this State, passed April 9, 1856 (chap. 146, Laws of 1856); that under the authority conferred by said act, plaintiff had acquired title to lands in the town of Greenbush, in the county of Rensselaer', and had erected a bridge over and across the Hudson river, the westerly portion of which is in the city and county of Albany, the easterly portion, from the center of the channel of the…
1Per curiam
"We think tbe real estate of a toll-bridge should be assessed in tbe town in wbicb it is situated. Such is tbe rule in regard to all incorporated companies (1 R. S., 389, § 6), and we do not think tbe concluding clause of that section was intended to create a different rule in regard to toll-bridges. ~We think that clause refers to tbe place of taxation of tbe personal property, and to that only. There is no apparent reason why a different mode of assessment should prevail in case of toll-bridges. Tbe views of tbe chancellor in Utica Cotton Manufacturing Company v. Supervisors (1 Barb. Ch.,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Oswego Starch Factory v. . DollowayNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Utica Cotton Manufacturing Co. v. Supervisors of Oneida CountyNew York Court of Chancery · 1846