« PreviousContinue »
Property included in railroad mortgage, see
“Mortgages," 8 2.
road commissioners, see “Certiorari," $ 1.
§ 1. Control and regulation in general.
Laws 1860, p. 16, c. 10, held not to affect the
right to construct a railroad on Long Island or
v. O'Brien (Sup.) 909.
Under Laws 1890, p. 1089, c. 565, § 16, em-
bracing Laws 1880, p. 872, c. 582, amended by
visions retroactive, to include corporations or-
ganized under Laws 1850, p. 211, c. 140, an
ordinance adopted December 31, 1890, permit-
ting the construction of a tunnel under New
York City streets was valid.--New York & L. I.
R. Co. v. O'Brien (Sup.) 909.
§ 2. Railroad companies.
The provision in Laws 1850, p. 211, c. 140,
that the certificate of incorporation of a railroad
by naming the towns, villages, or cities which
I. R. Co. v. O'Brien (Sup.) 909.
A railroad held not to have forfeited its cor-
porate rights conferred by Laws 1850, p. 211,
775, by lapse of time.- New York & L. I. R.
Co. v. O'Brien (Sup.) 909.
Ten per cent of the capital stock of a rail-
road held not paid in cash, as required by Rail-
the certificate of public convenience and neces-
sity required by section 59 (page 1395) may be
of any avail.--People v. Public Service Commis-
sion Second Dist. (Sup.) 968.
8 3. Right of way and other interests
*Where the owner of land through which a
railroad right of way passed used certain cross-
ings, no cause of action against the railroad ac-
crued to him by reason of slight alterations of
the grade of the tracks and roadway of the
R. R. Co. (Sup.) 381.
* Action to determine claim to real estate dis *A railroad may make such reasonable chan-
advantageous use of its property and its grow-
R. R. Co. (Sup.) 381.
*A landowner held not injured by the erection
of a platform for the shipment of fruit on de-
fendant railroad's right of way.--Townsend v.
Where permits were granted a railroad by
tunnel under land given the city by Laws 1870,
by construction of railroad bridge, see "Costs,” p. 1242, c. 574, 86, subd. 10, and in control
of the dock board, held, that the city could not
after the expenditure of large sums thereunder.
and 140 New York State Reporter § 4. Construction, maintenance, and Evidence in an action against a railroad for equipment.
running its train over a fire hose held to warA finding that a railroad company failed to rant a finding that defendant's servants knew construct in its roadbed a sufficient culvert held the hose was lying across the tracks.-Phenix warranted.-Strong V. Rutland R. Co. (Sup.) Ins. Co. of Brooklyn v. New York Cent. & H. R. 85.
R. Co. (Sup.) 696. The negligence of a railroad company in allowing ice to accumulate in a culvert in its roadbed held for the jury.-Strong v. Rutland R. Co. (Sup.) 85.
See "Ejectment." *Railroad Law, Laws 1897, p. 794, c. 754, $ 60, relating to the elimination of grade crossings, construed, and held to authorize the elimi
REAL ESTATE AGENTS. nation of sidings or switches crossing highways at grade, where the railroad concedes that the See “Brokers." board of railroad commissioners may deal with them.-In re Terminal Ry. of Buffalo (Sup.) 655; Appeal of Town of Cheektowaga, ld.;
RECEIVERS. In re Terminal Ry. of Buffalo (Sup.) 659; Appeal of Town of West Seneca, Id.
Comity between courts of different states in *Railroad Law, Laws 1897, p. 796, c. 754, Deposit of amount of judgment with receivers
receivership proceedings, see "Courts," $ 5. $ 62, relating to the power of the board of railroad commissioners to abolish grade crossings, In action to foreclose mortgage, see “Mort
as payment, see "Judgment," $ 7. construed, and held to confer on the board designated powers, subject to judicial review.-In In supplementary proceedings, see "Execution,"
gages," $ 3. re Terminal Ry. of Buffalo (Sup.) 635; Appeal of Town of Cheektowaga, Id.; In re Ter
$ 3. minal Ry. of Buffalo (Sup.) '650; Appeal of Of corporations in general, see "Corporations." Town of West Seneca, Id.
Review of discretionary rulings as to appoint*Where parallel streets extend across rail
ment of, see “Appeal," 8. road tracks, and the crossings are dangerous, the board of railroad commissioners may de- $ 1. Nature and grounds of receivertermine the number of viaducts and adjudge on
ship. what streets traffic shall be diverted.-In re
*Generally stated, the principal ground for Terminal Ry. Co. (Sup.) 655; Appeal of Town the appointment of a receiver is danger of the of Cheektowaga, Id.; In re Terminal Ry. of loss of, or injury to, the property or thing in Buffalo (Sup.) 659; Appeal of Town of West controversy, before the court can make a disSeneca, Id.
position thereof by a final decree on the merits. $ 5. Operation.
-Hastings v. Tousey (Sup.) 639. *In an action for killing plaintiff's cow, a Code Civ. Proc. $ 713, providing for receivers, mere showing that the cow was struck by the excludes all cases except those specified and defendant's electric car and killed was insuffi- prohibits an appointment except as authorized. cient to support a verdict for plaintiff.-Craft --Hastings v. Tousey (Sup.) 639. V. Peekskill Lighting & R. Co. (Sup.) 232. *The rule that failure to look and listen be- payment made by a purchaser at a receiver
An order directing forfeiture of an initial fore crossing a railroad track is contributory sale, who failed to comply with his bid, held negligence held subject to limitations on
to make the money so paid assets in the receircount of the age, sex, and condition of plaintiff er's hands for disbursement.-Coe v. Patterson and the surrounding circumstances: -- Noakes v. (Sup.) 639. New York Cent. & H. R. R. Co. (Sup.) 522.
*It is ordinarily the duty of a passenger in a § 2. Allowance and payment of claims. vehicle to look and listen before crossing a rail
Ordinarily, a judgment against a receiver in road track.- Noakes v. New York Cent. & H. his official capacity gives the judgment creditor R. R. Co. (Sup.) 522.
no preference over other creditors in the same
class.-Coe v. Patterson (Sup.) 659. *In an action for injuries in a collision with defendant's train, whether plaintiff was guilty & 3. Actions. of contributory negligence in failing to look and A court's order for expenditures which a relisten, etc., held a question for the jury.-ceiver made in reliance thereon, protects the Noakes v. New York Cent. & H. R. R. Co. receiver while in force, though it may be after(Sup.) 522.
wards reversed.-Coe v. Patterson (Sup.) 659. *In an action against a railroad company for *An action against a receiver in his official injuries sustained in a collision at a crossing, capacity held an election not to charge him peran instruction held properly refused as being in sonally, so that the judgment recovered against substance a request to find for defendant.-him merely amounted to the establishment of a Noakes v. New York Cent. & H. R. R. Co. claim against him as receiver.-Coe v. Patter(Sup.) 522.
son (Sup.) 659.
$ 4. Accounting and compensation. Previous decisions of court as controlling ref-
Where the last approved account of a receiver eree, see "Courts," $ 2.
*An objection that all parties are not before
Knickerbocker Inv. Co. v. Voorhees (Sup.)
455; In re Davies, Stone & Auerbach, Id.
*In an action to enjoin a nuisance, where a
*An order on notice to a receiver, but not to
Of particular classes of rights and liabilities.
Tenant," § 4.
Bequests to, see "Wills," $ 4.
Creation by will, see "Wills," 8 5.
*One's right to recover land in which he has
a remainder interest held not to accrue till
death of the life tenant.-Bush v. Halsted (Sup.)
88 1, 3.
REMEDY AT LAW.
Effect on jurisdiction of equity, see “Injunc.
tion," $ 1.
lawful combination, see "Monopolies,” $ 1.
and 140 New York State Reporter REMOVAL.
RES IPSA LOQUITUR. Of county officer, see “Counties," $ 1.
Injuries to employés, see “Master and Serv.
See "Judgment,” 88 4, 5.
$ 1. Transfer of causes as between dockets on cal
RESOLUTION. endars, see “Trial," $ 1.
Of municipal council, see "Municipal Corpora
tions," 8 8. REMOVAL OF CLOUD.
RESTRAINT OF TRADE, See "Quieting Title."
Trusts and other combinations, see “MonopoRENEWAL.
lies," § 1. Of lease, see “Landlord and Tenant," 2.
See “Trusts," $ 1.
Of election, see "Elections," $ 3.
To writ of certiorari, see "Certiorari," $ 1. Of bridge, see “Bridges," $ 1.
See "Appeal"; "Certiorari"; "Criminal Law,"
7; “Justices of the Peace," $ 2. § 1. Right of action and defenses. * Plaintiff, in actual possession of personalty,
REVIVAL. cannot maintain replevin therefor.-Mahr v. Livingstone (Sup.) 308.
Of statute, see “Statutes," $ 2.
REVOCATION. Of commissioners in condemnation proceed or licenses relating to real property, see "Li
ings, see “Eminent Domain,” $ 2. On reference, see "Reference," § 2.
censes," 8 1. Of license to railroad company to construct
tunnel, see "Railroads," $ 3. RESCISSION,
Of liquor license, see "Intoxicating Liquors,"
$ 2. Of contract, see "Contracts," & 4.
Of probate of will, see "Wills," $$ 3, 4. Of contract for sale of land, see “Vendor and Of sentence in criminal prosecution, see "CrimPurchaser," $ 3.
inal Law," $ 6. Of insurance policy, see "Insurance," $$ 3, 4.
RIGHT OF WAY.
Of railroads, see "Railroads," § 3.
Assumed by employé, see "Master and Sery. In civil actions, see "Evidence," $ 3.
ant," $$ 6, 9, 11. * Point annotated. See syllabus.
*Possession of cotton cloth belonging to plain-
tiffs by selling agents, according to a custom of
the cotton converting business, held not such as
cloth from the agents' pledgees.-Schwab v. Oat-
man (Sup.) 741.
$ 3. Remedies of seller.
Under a complaint to recover the contract
price of brick, an additional sum cannot be re-
covered in that there was an extra cost of de-
livery caused by vendees.-Clonin v. Lippe (Sup.)
*ln an action for a balance due on a contract
sufficient to go to the jury.-W. J. Morgan &
Co. v. Heitmann (Sup.) 253.
Plaintiff's right to recover a balance on
terstate commerce, see "Commerce," $ 1. band held not to depend on defendant's relation
concerning additional printing:-W. J. Morgan
& Co. v. Heitmann (Sup.) 253.
In an action on notes given for a soda foun-
by false representations held not sustained.
Carbonating Apparatus Co. v. Geary (Sup.) 768.
In an action on notes given for a soda foun-
tain, the defense that there was a failure of
consideration held not sustained.-Carbonating
Apparatus Co. v. Geary (Sup.) 768.
capacity, sold stone to defendant, defendant
could not defeat an action for its value merely
ficial capacity.-Pizzutielle v. Graham (Sup.)
The owner of stone sold by him to defendant
can recover its value, even though he did not at
In an action for goods sold and delivered,
where it is shown that plaintiff was the owner
competent.--- Pizzutielle v. Graham (Sup.) 1099.
*In an action for the price of goods sold posi-
tive testimony of plaintiff that defendants pur-
Mills v. Hewes (Co. Ct.) 1026.
*A purchaser under an executory sale may
well as for a breach of warranty or_upon a
*Point annotated. See syllabus.