Legal Opinion

McCutchen v. Village of Peekskill

New York Supreme Court

Decided February 23, 1938PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNolan, J.

These actions are brought to recover damages sustained by reason of the flooding of plaintiffs’ premises in the village of Peekskill by the waters of McGregory brook, a natural stream running through the village, into which the defendant drained surface waters by means of sewers from an area conceded to be less than the natural drainage area of the brook. In 1905 the defendant, pursuant to a recorded agreement with plaintiffs’ predecessors in ownership of the property damaged, constructed over part of the brook adjacent to plaintiffs’ property a cover, upon which was constructed a public…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Noonan v. . City of AlbanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
  2. O'Donnell v. . City of SyracuseNew York Court of Appeals · 1906
  3. Cashin v. City of New RochelleNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
  4. Fox v. City of New RochelleNew York Court of Appeals · 1925
  5. Prime v. . City of YonkersNew York Court of Appeals · 1908

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Haferkamp v. City of Rock HillSupreme Court of Missouri · 1958
  2. Annutto v. Town of HerkimerNew York Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Walter Legge Co. v. City of PeekskillAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  4. Archer v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Archer v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941

1 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