Legal Opinion

In re the Proceeding, under the Grade Crossing Elimination Act

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 13, 1940No. Case No. 4666PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Per curiam

The appellant Western New York Water Company contends that the words “ incidental improvements connected therewith ” as used in the grade crossing amendment (State Const, art. VII, § 14), and in the enabling act (Laws of 1939, chap. 289) are intended to include the cost of the relocation of its water mains made necessary by a grade crossing elimination. Prior to the Constitutional Amendment, the common-law obligation of a utility to relocate its own structures at its own expense in connection with a grade crossing elimination program was definitely declared. (Transit Comm. v. Long Island R.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bertles v. . NunanNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
  2. Transit Commission v. Long Island RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1930

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Delaware River Port Authority v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  2. State Ex Rel. Rich v. Idaho Power Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Northwestern Bell Telephone Company v. WentzNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Adler v. Board of EducationNew York Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Niagara, Lockport & Ontario Power Corp. v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1946

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

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

Powered by the Exa API