Hudson River Railroad v. Outwater

3 Sandf. 689
CourtThe Superior Court of New York City
DecidedDecember 31, 1850
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 3 Sandf. 689 (Hudson River Railroad v. Outwater) 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
Hudson River Railroad v. Outwater, 3 Sandf. 689 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1850).

Opinion

By the Court.

Where special acts of incorporation prescribe a particular mode of ascertaining damages for lands taken for these quasi public works, that mode is not affected by the general act of 1850 for the incorporation of railroads by voluntary asso[691]*691ciation, which subjects all existing railroad companies to its provisions, where not inconsistent with those contained in their charters.

As to the principal questions discussed :

1. The company had an undoubted right, under the fifth section of its charter, to change and alter the line of their roadway, if the directors deemed it might be thereby improved, so as to take different land of the same owner, or a part of the same land that they had previously designated on their filed map.

2. ¡Neither the company have any vested or indefeasible right or title to the land mapped and sought to be taken, nor the owner any such right or title to the compensation therefor ascertained by the commissioners, until their report is filed and confirmed, and the order of the court made for the payment of the amount. Until then, the proceeding is incomplete, and it may be set aside or abandoned. If there be needless delay in the application to confirm the report, the owner can move the court on the subject. And if the proceeding be relinquished, the court, we think, has the power to indemnify the land owner in respect of his expenses.

We will, therefore, make an order appointing commissioners, on the company’s paying to these owners their expenses for witnesses and counsel on the former appraisement. We shall appoint the same commissioners that acted before, there being no allegation against the fitness of either of them.

Order accordingly.

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

Related

County of Onondaga v. White
38 Misc. 587 (New York Supreme Court, 1902)
Onondaga County v. White
77 N.Y.S. 1074 (New York Supreme Court, 1902)
First National Bank v. West River Railroad
49 Vt. 167 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1876)
Washington Park v. Barnes
2 Thomp. & Cook 637 (New York Supreme Court, 1874)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 Sandf. 689, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hudson-river-railroad-v-outwater-nysuperctnyc-1850.