Genet v. President of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.

The Superior Court of New York City

Genet v. President of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.

29 Jones & S. 332, 47 N.Y. St. Rep. 291

CourtThe Superior Court of New York City

DecidedJuly 5, 1892

StatusPublished

This text of 29 Jones & S. 332 (Genet v. President of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of New York City primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Genet v. President of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co., 29 Jones & S. 332, 47 N.Y. St. Rep. 291 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The court at special term had power to order restitution (Wright v. Nostrand, 100 N. Y., 616; Carleton v. The Mayor, 19 Weekly Digest, 354), and as the method adopted to enforce it carried out the necessary effect of the judgment of the Court of Appeals and rendered it effectual, there is no necessity for condemning it by a reversal.

The order should be affirmed, with ten dollars costs, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

The court at special term had power to order restitution (Wright v. Nostrand, 100 N. Y., 616; Carleton v. The Mayor, 19 Weekly Digest, 354), and as the method adopted to enforce it carried out the necessary effect of the judgment of the Court of Appeals and rendered it effectual, there is no necessity for condemning it by a reversal.

The order should be affirmed, with ten dollars costs, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 Jones & S. 332, 47 N.Y. St. Rep. 291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/genet-v-president-of-the-delaware-hudson-canal-co-nysuperctnyc-1892.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack