Farrer v. Piecuch
This text of 278 A.D. 1011 (Farrer v. Piecuch) 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.
Opinion
— Judgment affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Respondents and their predecessors for many years have enjoyed peaceable possession of the filled-in land lying between the road, known as Schnackel Drive, and the present shoreline. That being true, respondents need not prove title to maintain this action founded on trespass. The appellants show no better title, and their trespass cannot be justified upon the weakness of respondents’ title. (Beardslee v. New Berlin Light & Power Co., 207 N. Y. 34.) While we hold that respondents may main[1012]*1012tain this action in trespass, we do not pass upon or determine the rights of the parties in the disputed area. We also find that the evidence amply sustains respondents’ claim to a prescriptive right to the small portion of appellants’ lot No. 16 used as a means of ingress and egress to their garage and thus appellants should be enjoined from interfering therewith. All concur. (Appeal from a judgment for plaintiffs in an injunction action.) Present — Taylor, P. J., Vaughan, Kimball, Piper and Wheeler, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
278 A.D. 1011, 106 N.Y.S.2d 157, 1951 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5508, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farrer-v-piecuch-nyappdiv-1951.