Pocantico Water Works Co. v. Bird
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered upon an order made February 25, 1889, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered upon an order made February 25, 1889, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. The judgment below “ enjoined and restrained from constructing, erecting or maintaining any dam or dams, reservoir or reservoirs, upon the Pocantico river, a stream in the town of Ossining and Mount Pleasant, county of Westchester, or any of its tributaries for any of the defendants’ purposes; and from intercepting, diverting, appropriating or…
1Opinion of the CourtHaight, J.
This action was brought to restrain the defendants, who were acting as the board of water commissioners of Tarrytown, from locating and constructing a dam and reservoir upon the premises of one George Hart on the Pocantico river,. at a point between the plaintiff’s dam and its contemplated storage reservoir.
The plaintiff was organized under chapter 737 of the Laws' of 1873, as subsequently amended, and had entered into contracts with the villages of LTorth Tarrytown, Dobbs Ferry and Hastings to supply them with pure and wholesome water. It had located its works upon the Pocantico river, and…
2Cited by55 opinions
- Matter of N.Y. City H. Authority v. MullerNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
- Denihan Enterprises, Inc. v. O'DwyerNew York Court of Appeals · 1951
- Thayer v. California Development Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
- Hildreth v. Montecito Creek Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
- Leavitt v. Lassen Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.