Singleton v. McGurk
New York Supreme Court
Action to restrain the defendant from cutting off or disconnecting the pipes supplying water to the plaintiffs’ premises.
1Opinion of the CourtGiegerich, J.
The action is to restrain the defendant from interfering with pipes laid across his premises to conduct water to the plaintiffs’ house and premises or with the supply of water therefrom. In 1914 one Thomas Grilday was the owner of the premises on the southerly side of Bast Two Hundred and Thirty-first street, in the borough of The Bronx, New York city, known by the street number 1094 Bast Two Hundred and Thirty-first street, and the defendant was the owner of the premises known as No. 1050 Bast Two Hundred and Thirty-second street in said borough, the said premises being situated on the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Wiseman v. . LucksingerNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Cronkhite v. . CronkhiteNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Strough v. . WilderNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- City of N.Y. v. . N.Y. S.B. Ferry S.T. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1921
- Voorhees v. Presbyterian ChurchNew York Supreme Court · 1853
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gleason v. TompkinsNew York Supreme Court · 1975
- Rochester Poster Advertising Co. v. SmithersNew York Supreme Court · 1927