Kelley v. Horton

New York Supreme Court

Kelley v. Horton

2 Cow. 424

DecidedOctober 15, 1823

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Cow. 424 (Kelley v. Horton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kelley v. Horton, 2 Cow. 424 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1823).

Pincite

Opinion

Curia.

The testimony of the witness who heard the plaintiff tell the overseer that he would open his fence, when , , . the latter wished to work the road, seems to admit that a roaci had been laid there; hut by the 39th section of the act to regulate highways, (2 R. L. 283,) the plaintiff was entitled to 60 days notice from the commissioners, or a majority of them, to remove his fences : and the overseer had no right , ... , . , . to open the road without their orders. The verdict is against ^aw an¿ evidence.

T 1 Judgment reversed.

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

Curia.

The testimony of the witness who heard the plaintiff tell the overseer that he would open his fence, when , , . the latter wished to work the road, seems to admit that a roaci had been laid there; hut by the 39th section of the act to regulate highways, (2 R. L. 283,) the plaintiff was entitled to 60 days notice from the commissioners, or a majority of them, to remove his fences : and the overseer had no right , ... , . , . to open the road without their orders. The verdict is against ^aw an¿ evidence.

T 1 Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Cow. 424, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelley-v-horton-nysupct-1823.