Parmelee v. Oswego & Syracuse Railroad
New York Supreme Court
This was an appeal, by the plaintiffs, from a judgment entered in favor of the defendants, upon the direction'and in pursuance of a decision of Justice Pratt, before whom the cause was tried. The suit was commenced by summons and complaint, according to the code of procedure, in July, 1848; and was tried in April, 1849, before the justice, without a jury; a trial by jury being waived by the respective parties.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal, by the plaintiffs, from a judgment entered in favor of the defendants, upon the direction'and in pursuance of a decision of Justice Pratt, before whom the cause was tried. The suit was commenced by summons and complaint, according to the code of procedure, in July, 1848; and was tried in April, 1849, before the justice, without a jury; a trial by jury being waived by the respective parties. The facts appearing in evidence upon the trial are sufficiently set forth in the opinion of Gridley, J. which follows. No question was made by the plaintiffs in respect to the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Gridley, J.
This action was brought to recover damages, for the alledged trespass committed by the defendants in excavating and laying the track of the Oswego and Syracuse railroad, through lands claimed by the plaintiffs; and also to recover the possession of the said lands. It appears that *615two of the plaintiffs, Robert C. and Sands N. Kenyon, acquired their interest in the premises in question on the 9th of May, 1848. And there is no evidence in the bill of exceptions, that any acts of the defendants charged as trespasses, were committed after that time. It is stated that the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bloodgood v. Mohawk & Hudson RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1837
- Beekman v. Saratoga & Schenectady Rail RoadNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
- Moakley v. RiggsNew York Supreme Court · 1821
- Wells v. SmithNew York Court of Chancery · 1837
- Jackson ex dem. Mancius v. LawtonNew York Supreme Court · 1813
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Doll v. MeadorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Nathan E. Hooper, Louisa J. Hooper, and Amanda E. Hooper, Minors, by Absalom Fowler, Their Next Friend, in Error v. Jacob ScheimerSupreme Court of the United States · 1860
- Palmer v. AldridgeNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Kissock v. GrantNew York Supreme Court · 1861
- Thompson v. BurhansNew York Supreme Court · 1870
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.