In re Alston

New York Court of General Session of the Peace

In re Alston

40 A. 938, 17 Del. 359, 1 Penne. 359, 1898 Del. LEXIS 32

New York Court of General Session of the Peace·Decided June 17, 1898·Published

Opinion

The Court

decided that the language of Section 4, standing alone, was broad enough to admit of such a construction as counsel contended for ; that is, that the word ‘1 change ’ ’ could be construed to mean alter ; but that the language of Section 5 restricted the word ‘ ‘ change ’ ’ in section 4, to mean change the course of. While there was authority given in the statute to lay out a new road, to change the course of a road already laid out, or to vacate a road, yet that there was no power given therein to widen a road.

The return of the commissioners was therefore set aside; and the Court refused to make an order taxing the costs.

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

The Court

decided that the language of Section 4, standing alone, was broad enough to admit of such a construction as counsel contended for ; that is, that the word ‘1 change ’ ’ could be construed to mean alter ; but that the language of Section 5 restricted the word ‘ ‘ change ’ ’ in section 4, to mean change the course of. While there was authority given in the statute to lay out a new road, to change the course of a road already laid out, or to vacate a road, yet that there was no power given therein to widen a road.

The return of the commissioners was therefore set aside; and the Court refused to make an order taxing the costs.

In re Alston, 40 A. 938, 17 Del. 359, 1 Penne. 359, 1898 Del. LEXIS 32 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1898).

Pincite

40 A. 938 (In re Alston) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.