Legal Opinion
Hudson River R. Dist. v. F., J. G.R.R. Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 31, 1928PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Plaintiff is a public corporation created pursuant to section 432 of the Conservation Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 65) and is authorized pursuant to section 446 of that statute to acquire real estate by condemnation. It brought this proceeding to acquire title to and possession of certain property of the Fonda, Johnstown and Gloversville Railroad Company in Fulton county. Its stated purpose was the construction of a dam and reservoir for the regulation of the flow of the waters of Sacandaga river which lie within the territory of the Hudson River Regulating District. Commissioners were appointed to…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- The Minnesota Rate CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- United States v. Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Colorado v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Erie Railroad v. Board of Public Utility CommissionersSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Dayton-Goose Creek Railway Co. v. United States, Interstate Commerce CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Wisconsin Central Ltd. v. City of MarshfieldDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 2000
- Elberton Southern Railway Co. v. State Highway DepartmentSupreme Court of Georgia · 1955
- People v. RuefferNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
- New York Telephone Co. v. WoodNew York Supreme Court · 1931
- Chicago, R. I. & G. Ry. Co. v. Tarrant County Water Control & Improvement Dist. No. 1Court of Appeals of Texas · 1934
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.