Beardsley v. Lehigh Valley Railway Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made October 4, 1892, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made October 4, 1892, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The plaintiffs should not have the relief prayed for because damages for this identical cause of action have already been awarded and paid them in the proceedings to condemn the land. (Embury v. Conner, 3 N. Y. 511 ; Clemens v. Clemens, 37 id. 59.) Our…
1Opinion of the CourtFinch, J.
Two questions of law are raised in this case. The action is in equity to compel the defendant company to construct an under-grade crossing on the plaintiff’s farm. One of the reasons now given for such a crossing is that there may be in that manner provided a safe and convenient passage for cattle to reach water which would be much more inconvenient and unsafe if the only crossings were at grade. The defendant answered that such inconvenience had already been allowed and paid for by the award in condemnation proceedings, and some of the evidence at that time given was recited as proof of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jones v. . SeligmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
3Cited by4 opinions
- Holmberg v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1927
- Powell v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- State ex rel. Jacquith v. Wisconsin Central Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
- Wagner v. Central N. E. & W. R.New York Supreme Court · 1894