Legal Opinion

St. John v. Sweeney

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1879PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Motion to continue injunction.

1Opinion of the CourtWestbrook, J.

—Nothing in the shape of a formal discus sion of the interesting questions in this cause will be attempted, but a simple statement of points will be given.

1st. Without an agreement between the owners of property, allowing them, windows have no proper place in a party wall. This is evident from the uses and objects of party walls, with which use windows are inconsistent. No written contract allowing them to be placed in the wall between the property of the parties, and to be there continued unobstructed is *176shown, but the existence thereof is argued from certain acts and conduct of the owners…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Normille v. GillMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
  2. Springer v. DarlingtonIllinois Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Cutting v. StokesNew York Supreme Court · 1893
  4. National Commercial Bank v. GrayNew York Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Metzger v. 46 West 95th Street, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API