Thompson v. . Schermerhorn
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from the general term of the Supreme Court, in the fourth district, where a judgment for the defendant, entered upon the report of a referee, had been affirmed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the general term of the Supreme Court, in the fourth district, where a judgment for the defendant, entered upon the report of a referee, had been affirmed. (Reported below, 9 Barb. 152.) This was an action of assumpsit, by the Treasurer of the city of Schenectady, to recover the cost of pitching, grading, paving and flagging a street in that city, in front of lots owned by the defendant, amounting to about $820. The declaration set forth an act of the legislature, entitled “ an act relative, to the. city of Schenectady,” passed the 29th April 1833, c. 293, the 34th section of…
1Opinion of the CourtFoot, J.
— The decision of this cause turns on the true construction of the 34th section of “ an act relative to the city of Schenectady.’” (Laws of 1833, p. 457.) By that section, the common council of- the city are authorized to make “by-laws and ordinances, ordering and # gg directing any of the streets * * *to be pitched, -* levelled, paved, flagged, * * * or for the altering or repairing the same, within such time, and in such manner, as they may prescribe, under the superintendence and direction of the city superintendent.” The common council passed an ordinance, in October 1843, by which they…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Birdsall v. . ClarkNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
3Cited by36 opinions
- Board of Commissioners v. AbbottSupreme Court of Kansas · 1893
- Bolton v. GilleranCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Maxwell v. Bay City Bridge Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Birdsall v. . ClarkNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Phelps v. . Mayor, Etc., of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.