People Ex Rel. Barnes v. Gardner
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Awarding A peremptory mandamus. In September, 1849, the canal appraisers made an Award to the relator for $8043-.35 for damages-from the appropriation of his land and waters. Appeals were taken •on behalf of the canal commissioners, representing the State, and also by the relator. On the -29th December, 1859, the canal board adopted a resolution-adding $4,010 -to the award.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Awarding A peremptory mandamus. In September, 1849, the canal appraisers made an Award to the relator for $8043-.35 for damages-from the appropriation of his land and waters. Appeals were taken •on behalf of the canal commissioners, representing the State, and also by the relator. On the -29th December, 1859, the canal board adopted a resolution-adding $4,010 -to the award. The resolution simply directed’this increase, without recital-or statements of any facts or grounds ‘for thus modifying the award. At -the-time of. its "passage, the appeal was…
1Opinion of the Court
The canal board is clothed with certain judicial powers. It is authorized, upon appeal, to review the decisions of the canal appraisers, and reverse or affirm, or modify their appraisements. (1 R.S., 5th ed., p. 597, § 106; Laws of 1829, ch. 368, § 3.) The board is composed of administrative officers, and is entitled to exercise no judicial functions except those specially and distinctly conferred by some legislative act. The rules of law applicable to inferior magistrates or courts of special and limited jurisdiction apply to it. These rules are, that nothing shall be intended to be within…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- People v. AllenNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Striker v. KellyNew York Supreme Court · 1845
- Wiggin v. Mayor of New-YorkNew York Court of Chancery · 1841
- Gale v. MeadNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- People ex rel. Westcott v. HolleyNew York Supreme Court · 1834
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- In re City of RochesterNew York Supreme Court · 1890