Holtz v. Diehl
New York Supreme Court
Motion by the defendants to vacate an injunction granted in this action on the 8th day of December, 1898, and for such furthei or other relief as may be just and equitable. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtChilds, J.
The defendants are members of and collectively compose the board of park commissioners of the city of Buffalo, and as such board on or about the 1st day of ¡November, 1898, adopted the report of a committee of said board recommending that a “ speedway be constructed on Humboldt parkway, between Kensington and Delavan avenues, as per plans submitted; work to be commenced as soon as funds are available; ” the plan referred to being the same as outlined in the map attached to the answer of the defendants in this action. Thereafter and at a special meeting of said board held on the 26th day of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Talcott v. . City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Ziegler v. . ChapinNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Adamson v. Nassau Electric RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1895
3Cited by6 opinions
- Board of Com'rs v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
- McCutcheon v. Terminal Station CommissionNew York Supreme Court · 1914
- People ex rel. Smith v. MosierAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
- Burberry Limited, Cartier North America, a division of Richemont North America, Inc., Chanel, Inc., Christian Dior Couture, S.A., Fendi S.R.L., Gucci America, Inc., Hermes International, J. Choo Limited, Louis Vuitton Malletier, Michael Kors, L.L.C., Parfums Christian Dior, S.A., PRL USA Holdings, Inc., Richemont International SA, and Yves Saint Laurent SAS v. Various John Does, Jane Does, and XYZ CompaniesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2026
- East Side Parkways Coalition v. New York State Dept. of Transp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2026
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.