Legal Opinion

Mtr. City of Ny (Sealand Dock)

New York Court of Appeals

Decided July 7, 1971PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Chief Judge Fuld.

We thoroughly agree with the courts below that the claimants are entitled to only nominal damages because the three damage parcels before us were encumbered by public easements. Indeed, we would be content to affirm on the opinion by Special Term (66 Misc 2d 324) were it not for the fact that our dissenting brothers treat of matters which, though subsumed, were not discussed by that court.

It is true, as stated in the dissent, that a street “ dedication ” does not create a public easement unless there is evidence of an acceptance by the public of an offer to dedicate the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co. v. . City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
  2. Scarborough Properties Corp. v. Village of Briarcliff ManorNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
  3. Matter of City of New York (Main St.)New York Court of Appeals · 1915
  4. In re the City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1963

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. HalleckSupreme Court of the United States · 2019
  2. Perlmutter v. Four Star Development AssociatesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
  3. Romanoff v. Village of ScarsdaleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
  4. City of New York v. MazzellaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
  5. Ellis v. Town of E. Hampton, N.Y.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2025

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API