Legal Opinion

Saile v. Edell

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1916PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Demurrer by Evelyn M. Edell on the ground that the complaint does not state facts. sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

1Opinion of the CourtRodenbeck, J.

The defendant Evelyn M. Edell demurs to the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The action is brought to restrain the unauthorized use of a sewer in the town of Gates by the defendants and sufficient facts are alleged in the complaint to constitute a cause of action. It seems to me that a serious question is presented, however, as to the legal capacity of the town board to institute this action. Town of Hempstead v. Lawrence, 138 App. Div. 473; Tuma v. Piepenbrink, 77 Misc. Rep. 357; 160 App. Div. 225. The town board has no…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Town of Hempstead v. LawrenceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
  2. Irving National Bank v. CorbettNew York Supreme Court · 1881
  3. Tuma v. PiepenbrinkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
  4. Tuma v. PiepenbrinkNew York Supreme Court · 1912

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Yager v. YagerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925

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

Powered by the Exa API