City of Brooklyn v. . Copeland
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 May 13, 1885, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. This was an action to compel a specific performance of a contract for the purchase of certain lands. The substance of the pleadings and the material facts are set forth in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtBeckham, J.
The lands i n this action in controversy became the property of the city of Brooklyn under the act of the legislature passed May 2,1861, being chapter 340 of the Laws of that year.
Upon a sale by the city of these lands, the defendant purchased them and has since refused to complete his purchase, on the ground that the plaintiff cannot convey a good title in iee. The defendant claims that the act of 1861 did not vest an alienable fee in the plaintiff in lands duly acquired under its provisions, but only a right to the perpetual use of such lands for park purposes. He also claims to raise some…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Brooklyn Park Commissioners v. ArmstrongNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
3Cited by7 opinions
- Higginson v. Treasurer & School House CommissionersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Seattle Land & Improvement Co. v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1905
- Sharp v. City of GuthrieSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- State ex rel. Johnston v. City of ManhattanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1924
- Picconi v. CarlinNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1956
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.