Carter v. New York Central Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Carter v. New York Central Railroad

273 A.D. 884, 77 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5121

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

DecidedMarch 15, 1948

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 273 A.D. 884 (Carter v. New York Central Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carter v. New York Central Railroad, 273 A.D. 884, 77 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5121 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ,; Peck, P. J., and Callahan, J., dissent upon the ground that the abandonment of the use specified in the deed had either actually occurred or was imminent and inevitable at the time of the taking in coftdemnation. The breach of the condition subsequent in the deed was not the consequence of the condemnation, but the result of administrative mandates having the force of law effective as of dates antecedent to the proceedings in condemnation. We are of the opinion that under the circumstances the defendant is not entitled to more than a nominal part of the award, and the plaintiffs are entitled to the remainder. Accordingly, we vote to reverse the judgment appealed from and grant judgment for the plaintiffs to the extent indicated.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ,; Peck, P. J., and Callahan, J., dissent upon the ground that the abandonment of the use specified in the deed had either actually occurred or was imminent and inevitable at the time of the taking in coftdemnation. The breach of the condition subsequent in the deed was not the consequence of the condemnation, but the result of administrative mandates having the force of law effective as of dates antecedent to the proceedings in condemnation. We are of the opinion that under the circumstances the defendant is not entitled to more than a nominal part of the award, and the plaintiffs are entitled to the remainder. Accordingly, we vote to reverse the judgment appealed from and grant judgment for the plaintiffs to the extent indicated.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 A.D. 884, 77 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5121, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carter-v-new-york-central-railroad-nyappdiv-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack