Legal Opinion

In re Opening Hudson Avenue

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1876Published

This is an appeal by the city of Albany and its tax-payers, from an order of the Special Term, taxing the costs and charges of E. J. Meegan, as attorney, and JR. H. Bingham, as surveyor, in the above matter. In 1873 these proceedings were instituted, in pursuance of a resolution of the common council of the city of Albany, for the purpose of widening Hudson avenue, in the city of Albany.

Read the full summary

This is an appeal by the city of Albany and its tax-payers, from an order of the Special Term, taxing the costs and charges of E. J. Meegan, as attorney, and JR. H. Bingham, as surveyor, in the above matter. In 1873 these proceedings were instituted, in pursuance of a resolution of the common council of the city of Albany, for the purpose of widening Hudson avenue, in the city of Albany. Upon the coming in of the report of the commissioners, its confirmation was opposed by a number of the persons whose property was assessed, as benefited by the proposed improvement, and an order was entered,…

1Opinion of the Court

Boardman, J.:

In 1873 proceedings were instituted, for the opening and widening of Hudson avenue, commissioners appointed, surveys made, legal services rendered in aid of the commissioners, and finally an inquisition was found or report made, and filed with the county clerk. The attempt to open, etc., the avenue was after-wards abandoned, the Special Term having denied the motion to confirm the commissioners’ report. During this time Meegan was the corporation counsel, and Bingham city surveyor. Both had rendered important and valuable services in aid of the commissioners during the pendency…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Matter of DoddNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
  2. People ex rel. Clute v. BoardmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1868

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

Powered by the Exa API