Legal Opinion
Mullen v. State
New York Court of Claims
Decided May 8, 1959No. Claim No. 33574; Claim No. 33584; Claim No. 33667; Claim No. 33668PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCharles T. Major, J.
These claims were filed (1) to recover damages sustained by claimants by the appropriation of part of their properties; and (2) to recover damages for a de facto appropriation based on the contention that the highway in front of their respective properties was a three-rod road. The State denies any de facto appropriation and maintains that the highAvay is a four-rod road. The dispute resolves itself into a question whether the highway was a three- or four-rod road *64before the appropriation, and the location of the center line thereof.
This highway, which adjoins the properties of claimants Lee,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Sauer v. City of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Sauer v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1904
- City of Cohoes v. President of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Walker v. . CaywoodNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- St. Vincent Female Orphan Asylum v. City of TroyNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rinaldo v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1962
- Clark v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1963