Legal Opinion

Adirondack Railway Co. v. Indian River Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 1, 1898PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal by the defendants, the Indian River Company and others, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the Clinton Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Essex on the 25th day of October, 1897, continuing an injunction pendente lite^ The defendants, being the owners of a large amount of wild land in to wnships Nos. 15 and 32, Totten and Crossfield’s patent, so called, .• offered to sell the whole of township No. 15 and 18,000 acres in…

Read the full summary

Appeal by the defendants, the Indian River Company and others, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the Clinton Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Essex on the 25th day of October, 1897, continuing an injunction pendente lite^ The defendants, being the owners of a large amount of wild land in to wnships Nos. 15 and 32, Totten and Crossfield’s patent, so called, .• offered to sell the whole of township No. 15 and 18,000 acres in township 32 to the Forest Preserve Board ; such offer and negotiartions finally culminated in the Board of Forest Preserve^on…

1Opinion of the Court

Herrick, J.:

The forest preserve, the Adirondack Park, and what shall be embraced therein, are defined in chapter 488 of the Laws of 1892, as amended by chapter 395 of the Laws of 1895.

By chapter 220 of the Laws of 1897 the Governor of the State of New York was authorized to appoint three persons to constitute a board, known as the Forest Preserve Board. Section 2 of that act provides that it shall be the duty of such board, and it is thereby authorized, “to acquire for the State, by purchase of otherwise, land, structures or waters, or such portion thereof in the territory embraced in the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People of N.Y. v. . Canal Board of N.Y.New York Court of Appeals · 1874
  2. Rathbone v. . WirthNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
  3. Matter of City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
  4. Matter of Boston and Albany R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1873
  5. Matter of Petition of N.Y., L. W.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1885

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Delaware & Hudson Railroad v. Public Service CommissionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1931
  2. City of Buffalo v. DayNew York Supreme Court · 1957
  3. People v. Adirondack Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
  4. People v. Adirondack Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
  5. People v. Adirondack Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899

2 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