Legal Opinion

W. P. Tanner-Gross & Co. v. City of New York

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

Decided May 15, 1919PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The appellant has an adequate remedy at law. The questions it seeks to have decided in this action may all be determined in the condemnation proceeding which plaintiff seeks to enjoin (Matter of Mayor, 22 App. Div. 124; Hooker v. City of Rochester, 57 id. 530; affd., 172 N. Y. 665; Matter of City of Rochester [In re Neun], 102 App. Div. 99.) In such condemnation proceeding an appeal may be taken from the order overruling plaintiff’s objections, and upon such appeal all proceedings may be stayed. (Matter of Mayor, supra; Hooker v. City of Rochester, supra; Matter of City of Rochester [In re…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. In the Matter of the Dep't of Public ParksNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
  2. Matter of Mayor, Etc., of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1906
  3. In re City of RochesterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
  4. In re Mayor of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
  5. Hooker v. . City of RochesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1902

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Cannata v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API