Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co. v. Manhattan Elevated Railway Co.
New York Court of Common Pleas
Trial of an action to set aside certain tripartite agreements between the plaintiff and defendants. In April, 1866, the legislature of this state passed an act supplementary to the General Railroad Act of 1850, by which it provided for the incorporation of railways to be operated by means of a propelling rope or cable, attached to stationary power.
Read the full summary
Trial of an action to set aside certain tripartite agreements between the plaintiff and defendants. In April, 1866, the legislature of this state passed an act supplementary to the General Railroad Act of 1850, by which it provided for the incorporation of railways to be operated by means of a propelling rope or cable, attached to stationary power. Under this statute, in the summer of the above year, articles of association were filed by the West Side and Yonkers Patent Railway Company, which contemplated the building of a railway from the southerly extremity of the City of New York, through…
1Opinion of the CourtVan Brunt, J.
[After stating the facts as —This action is brought by the Metropolitan Railway Company, to set aside the agreements of October 22d, 1881, upon the following grounds:
1st. Because the Metropolitan directors had no power to modify the original leases and tripartite agreement of May 30th, 1879, without the consent of the shareholders.
2d. Because three of the Metropolitan directors were, at the time of the making of the October agreements, also directors of the Manhattan company—one of the contracting parties, whose interests were antagonistic to those of the Metropolitan company.
3d. Because the…
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Twin-Lick Oil Co. v. MarburySupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Elwood v. . the Western Union Telegraph Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Gould v. . Cayuga County National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Masson v. BovetCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
- Gardner v. . OgdenNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Wickersham v. CrittendenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Snow v. AlleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Curtin v. Salmon River Hydraulic Gold Mining & Ditch Co.California Supreme Court · 1900
- Woodruff v. Dubuque & Sioux City RailroadU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1887
- Continental Insurance v. New York & Harlem RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.