Wheeler v. Rochester & Syracuse Railroad
New York Supreme Court
Motion to dissolve an injunction. The plaintiff commenced his action by summons and complaint against the defendants, praying for a perpetual" injunction restraining the defendants from constructing their railroad track through the farm of the plaintiff, without providing a suitable farm crossing hy a viaduct at a point selected by the plaintiff, nearly in front of his buildings and directly opposite to the lane leading to his barn.
Read the full summary
Motion to dissolve an injunction. The plaintiff commenced his action by summons and complaint against the defendants, praying for a perpetual" injunction restraining the defendants from constructing their railroad track through the farm of the plaintiff, without providing a suitable farm crossing hy a viaduct at a point selected by the plaintiff, nearly in front of his buildings and directly opposite to the lane leading to his barn. There had been an appraisal hy commissioners, and compensation awarded for the land taken, which had been paid by the defendants. A temporary injunction had been…
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
This is obviously a proper case for both a temporary and a perpetual injunction, if the case made by the complaint shall remain substantially uncontroverted.
It is true, as urged by the defendants? counsel, that the de*229fendants, by the appraisal and the payment of the amount awarded as compensation, acquired a complete and perfect title to the land for their railroad track, as against the plaintiff, for the purpose of constructing their road substantially according to the plan contemplated and exhibited at the time of presenting their petition, and of the hearing before the commissioners, and…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Jones v. . SeligmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- State ex rel. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Missouri · 1917
- Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. HughesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1891
- Wademan v. . Albany and Susquehanna R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1873
- St. Paul & Sioux City Railroad v. MurphySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1873
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.