Kosmak v. . Mayor, Etc., of N.Y.
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made May 20, 1889, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon a verdict, and affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial. The complaint in this action set up two causes of action.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made May 20, 1889, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon a verdict, and affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial. The complaint in this action set up two causes of action. In the first it was alleged that plaintiff was the lessee of premises known as JSTos. 13 and 15 Chatham street, in the city of New York; that defendant, on or about the 1st of February, 1882, committed a nuisance upon the aforesaid premises by causing the refuse and contents…
1Opinion of the CourtAndrews, J.
We think the judgment in this case is clearly right, and little can be added to the satisfactory opinion of the General Term.
The sewer, so-called, from the Ottendorfer house, was constructed by the owner of the premises, with the consent of the city, as a private drain. It never changed its character. When the Ottendorfer premises were purchased for the Brooklyn Bridge the title vested in the city or for the benefit of the city, and was taken with the same rights which the grantor had in the drain. It did not become a public sewer because the municipality became the owner of the property.…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Robinson v. City of DanvilleSupreme Court of Virginia · 1903
- Josey v. Beaumont Waterworks Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1916
- Leonhardt v. City of New YorkAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1908
- People v. WillisNew York City Magistrates' Court · 1940
- Johnston v. City of CohoesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1928