Perrin v. . New York Central Railroad Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Where lots are sold by number designated on a map of the plat, and by such map such lots abut on a strip of land described on such map as a “ street,” or “ park," the purchaser of such lots is to be deemed as being bounded by the centre of said strip or “street.”
1Opinion of the Court
The entire and exclusive appropriation by the defendant, of the premises in controversy, laid down on the map, and there denominated "Park," was sufficient as a disseizin to entitle the plaintiff to recover in this action. (16 N.Y., 97; 24 id., 655; id., 658; 25 id., 526). The question here is whether the plaintiff, in conveying the nine lots which abutted on the strip called "Park," by numbers, referring to the map, passed the fee in this strip to the grantees, in the same manner and to the same extent as if the strip of land had been dedicated by him as a street for the use of the adjoining…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Williams v. . the New-York Central Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
3Cited by29 opinions
- Williams v. . GallatinNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Van Winkle v. . Van WinkleNew York Court of Appeals · 1906
- State ex rel. Wood v. SchweickardtSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- Strong v. . City of BrooklynNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Kennedy v. City of NevadaMissouri Court of Appeals · 1926
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.