In re Klock
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal from Madison county court. Theron Kloek and others appealed from the action of the sewer commissioners of the village of Oneida in making an apportionment and assessment of the expenses of constructing a sewer in said village. The county court affirmed the action of the commissioners, and appellants again appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Madison county court. Theron Kloek and others appealed from the action of the sewer commissioners of the village of Oneida in making an apportionment and assessment of the expenses of constructing a sewer in said village. The county court affirmed the action of the commissioners, and appellants again appealed. It appears that a sewer was constructed in the village of Oneida pursuant to chapter 375 of the Laws of 1889, and the acts amendatory thereof, and chapter 414 of the Laws of 1897. The commissioners, in their report, say “that said sewer is not intended to, and cannot be,…
1Opinion of the CourtHerrick, J.
The order or judgment of the county court herein is appealable. Section 1357 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that an appeal may be taken to the appellate division of the supreme court from an order affecting a substantial right, made by a court of record possessing original jurisdiction, or a judge thereof, in a special proceeding instituted in that court, or before a judge thereof, pursuant to a special statutory provision. The county court is a court of record possessing original jurisdiction. Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2, 340. The order appealed from affects a substantial right of the…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Hunt v. . HuntNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Merritt v. . Village of PortchesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Hassan v. . City of RochesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Colonial City Traction Co. v. Kingston City RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
- O'Reilley v. . City of KingstonNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Pulaski Stave Co. v. Miller's Creek Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1910
- Commerce Trust Co. v. KeckSupreme Court of Missouri · 1920