Legal Opinion
Fink v. Friedman
New York Supreme Court
Decided February 11, 1974PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBertram Harnett, J.
Neighbor Finks’ garage was constructed by builder 666 Realty Corp. (666) so close to neighbor Flood-Kolmel’s angular property line that driveway entry to the garage in. its present state requires passage over Flood-Kolmel land. In a local donnybrook, unfortunately common to neighborhood boundary disputation, the Finks seek here a declaration of easement (either express or implied) over their neighbor’s property, or in the alternative, rescission against the builder.
A. FACTS OF THE DRIVEWAY CONTROVERSY
First, a rough drawing of the physical scene in Baldwin, New York, will be helpful.
*430
As can be…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Callanan v. Keeseville, Ausable Chasm & Lake Champlain RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
- Heyman v. . BiggsNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- John F. Trainor Co. v. G. Amsinck & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1923
- Buffalo, Lockport & Rochester Railway Co. v. HoyerNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
- Alleva v. TornatoreNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Lipsky v. Commonwealth United Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
- Babylon Associates v. County of SuffolkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Vista Co. v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1989
- Stahl Management Corp. v. Conceptions UnlimitedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1983
- Singh v. CarringtonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.