Legal Opinion
Dooley v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided July 15, 1912PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Action for injunction and other relief. Trial by court without a jury.
1Opinion of the CourtScuddeb, J.
Plaintiff claims to be owner of uplands on the north shore of Staten Island at the juncture of bodies of water popularly known as Arthur Kill and Newark bay. Neighboring uplands belong to defendant and in connec*400tion therewith it has erected a wharf and bulkhead and has filled in lands under water. These erections and fillings are alleged by plaintiff to unlawfully interfere with her riparian rights, and also to be partly upon lands under water belonging to her.
The allegations of the complaint present two distinct propositions for consideration:
First. The riparian rights of plaintiff to the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Yates v. MilwaukeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Galway v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Trustees of the Freeholders & Commonalty of Brookhaven v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1907
- Johnston v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1862
- Miner v. . BeekmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Owen v. HubbardCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1970
- Mutual Chemical Co. of America v. Mayor of BaltimoreDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1940
- Dooley v. Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913