Legal Opinion

Caudwell v. Village of Hamburg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided May 15, 1936PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. Injunction suspended until September 6, 1936. All concur, except Edgeomb and Crosby, JJ., who dissent and vote for reversal on the law and facts, and to remit the case to the Special Term to determine the amount of the rental and fee damages which the plaintiff has sustained by reason of the appropriation by the defendant of plaintiff’s property rights in and to the stream in question, and that, when such damage has been determined, a judgment may be entered providing that, if within thirty days after the plaintiff shall tender to said defendant a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Cox v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1934
  2. Dailey v. Northern New York Utilities, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Shaw v. Rochester, Syracuse & Eastern RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Gregory v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1972
  2. Hackensack Water Company v. Village of NyackDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1968
  3. Hackensack Water Co. v. Village of NyackDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1970

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API