Legal Opinion

People v. Schermerhorn

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 2, 1855PublishedCited by 36 opinions

THIS was an appeal by the defendants,-from a judgment entered at a special term, after a trial at the circuit by the court without a jury. The action was brought by the attorney general, on the relation of Hunt, Taylor and Dubois. The complaint alleged that on February 10th, 1851, the people by letters patent, granted to the defendants lands under water, in and near the mouth of Bushwick inlet, in Kings county.

Read the full summary

THIS was an appeal by the defendants,-from a judgment entered at a special term, after a trial at the circuit by the court without a jury. The action was brought by the attorney general, on the relation of Hunt, Taylor and Dubois. The complaint alleged that on February 10th, 1851, the people by letters patent, granted to the defendants lands under water, in and near the mouth of Bushwick inlet, in Kings county. That the attorney general had reason to believe that such letters patent were obtained by fraudulent suggestions, and concealments of material facts, made by the defendants. That the…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court,

S. B. Strong, J.

The patent to the defendants is for lands covered with water in Bushwick creek, adjacent to their upland on the northerly side of it, and extending in front of the creek, into the East river, to the permanent water line of Greenpoint, established in 1849. The principal objections to the patent which I deem it necessary to consider, are that the lands in the creek were private property, and that the commissioners of the land office transcended the power conferred upon them by the statute in extending the grant to lands in the East river.

The plaintiffs allege that…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Rogers v. JonesNew York Supreme Court · 1828
  2. Goodell v. Jackson ex dem. SmithCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1823

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Daniel v. SimmsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Coxe v. . StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
  3. Dement v. RokkerIllinois Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Hurford v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1876
  5. Gallup v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1890

31 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