Legal Opinion

Van Alstyne v. City of Amsterdam

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1922PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAngell, J.

Plaintiff brings this action to recover for damage to his property caused by the going out on June 11, 1917, of part of a distributing reservoir dam maintained by defendant. Defendant contends that it is not hable for the reasons, first, that in maintaining the dam it was acting in a governmental capacity; second, that the giving way of the dam was caused by an unprecedented flood which it could not be expected to guard against, and was in effect an act of God; and third, that it adopted plans for the dam made by a reputable and competent engineer, that the dam was constructed in accordance…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Mayor of New-York v. BaileyNew York Supreme Court · 1845
  2. Urquhart v. . City of OgdensburgNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
  3. Wilson v. . City of TroyNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  4. Oakes Manufacturing Co. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
  5. Lefrois v. . County of MonroeNew York Court of Appeals · 1900

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Buda v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1950
  2. People v. RubinNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API