Hodgkinson v. Long Island Rail Road

4 Edw. Ch. 411, 1844 N.Y. LEXIS 518, 1844 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 10
New York Court of Chancery·Decided May 20, 1844·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

The Vice-Chancellor :

Held, that the court of chancery had not jurisdiction to restrain the construction of this great work or the use of it, when completed. That it was a matter of municipal regulation and the corporation of Brooklyn having granted to the defendants the privilege of constructing the tunnel for the purposes of their road, this court would not inquire whether the municipal authorities [412] of Brooklyn, in making such a grant,, had exceeded their powers or not. It was a matter triable at law and the parties aggrieved must be left to their legal remedy.

Motion denied, with costs.

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

Hodgkinson v. Long Island Rail Road, 4 Edw. Ch. 411, 1844 N.Y. LEXIS 518, 1844 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 10 (N.Y. 1844).

4 Edw. Ch. 411 (Hodgkinson v. Long Island Rail Road) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sears v. Crocker
69 N.E. 327 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1904)
Howlett v. N. Y., West Shore, &c. Railway Co.
14 Abb. N. Cas. 328 (New York Supreme Court, 1882)
United States v. Bailey
24 F. Cas. 940 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Virginia, 1879)
Sixth Avenue Railroad v. Gilbert Elevated Railway Co.
3 Abb. N. Cas. 372 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1876)
Baxter v. Spuyten Duyvil
11 Abb. Pr. 178 (New York Supreme Court, 1871)