Ontario Knitting Co. v. State
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal, by the plaintiff, the Ontario Knitting Company, from a judgment of the Court of Claims of the State of New York in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk of said court on the 26th day of September, 1910, dismissing the plaintiff’s claim.
Read the full summary
Appeal, by the plaintiff, the Ontario Knitting Company, from a judgment of the Court of Claims of the State of New York in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk of said court on the 26th day of September, 1910, dismissing the plaintiff’s claim. The Barge Canal Act, so called (Laws of 1903, chap. 147), in its 3d section designated the general route of the improved canals and directed the Superintendent of Public Works and the State Engineer to improve them in the manner indicated. (See, also, Id. § 3, as amd. by Laws of 1905, chap. 740, and Laws of 1907,-chap. 710.)…
1Dissent
Smith, P. J. (dissenting):
The Ontario Knitting Company claims damages for an alleged appropriation of its land for the purposes of the barge canal. Relief has been denied in the Court of Claims on the main ground that the appropriation was unnecessary and, therefore, unauthorized.
Prior to the construction of the barge canal the claimant’s property abutted the blue lines of the Oswego canal. Adjoining the claimant’s property was the towpath of that canal, about fifteen feet in breadth. On the other side of the claimant’s property was an hydraulic canal, so .that claimant’s property at the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Shoemaker v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- In the Matter of William A. FowlerNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- City on Boston v. TalbotMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
- Sweet v. Buffalo, New York & Philadelphia Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1879
- People v. . FisherNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.