Ehret v. New York & Harlem Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ehret v. New York & Harlem Railroad

74 A.D. 628, 77 N.Y.S. 1125

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1902

StatusPublished

This text of 74 A.D. 628 (Ehret v. New York & Harlem 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

Ehret v. New York & Harlem Railroad, 74 A.D. 628, 77 N.Y.S. 1125 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

O’Brien, J.:

The questions presented-^ save as to some rulings upon evidence to which exception was taken, and which we do not regard as very material—are similar to those in Pape v. New York & Harlem R. R. Co. (ante, p. 175.) The injunction granted should be modified for the same reason as in the case referred to, namely, that the learned trial judge overlooked the fact that. in addition to the width of the cut, which was fifty-six feet, there were sustaining walls which made the entire width of the ground occupied and used for railroad purposes sixty-one feet eight inches. The fee damages here awarded should also' be modified by reducingthem to $8,000, and the extra allowanee should accordingly be reduced. As so modified, the judgment should be affirmed, without costs. Ingraham and Hatch, JJ., concurred; Van Brunt, P. J., and McLaughlin, J., dissented.

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

O’Brien, J.:

The questions presented-^ save as to some rulings upon evidence to which exception was taken, and which we do not regard as very material—are similar to those in Pape v. New York & Harlem R. R. Co. (ante, p. 175.) The injunction granted should be modified for the same reason as in the case referred to, namely, that the learned trial judge overlooked the fact that. in addition to the width of the cut, which was fifty-six feet, there were sustaining walls which made the entire width of the ground occupied and used for railroad purposes sixty-one feet eight inches. The fee damages here awarded should also' be modified by reducingthem to $8,000, and the extra allowanee should accordingly be reduced. As so modified, the judgment should be affirmed, without costs. Ingraham and Hatch, JJ., concurred; Van Brunt, P. J., and McLaughlin, J., dissented.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 A.D. 628, 77 N.Y.S. 1125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ehret-v-new-york-harlem-railroad-nyappdiv-1902.