Magner v. Honeyman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Magner v. Honeyman

223 A.D. 846

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 15, 1928

StatusPublished

This text of 223 A.D. 846 (Magner v. Honeyman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Magner v. Honeyman, 223 A.D. 846 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment reversed upon the law and the facts, with costs. On the undisputed facts the former means of user by parcel C of its right of way over parcel D has been abandoned (Corning v. Gould, 16 Wend. 531; Welsh v. Taylor, 134 N. Y. 450, 457; Cartwright v. Maplesden, 53 id. 622; Lattimer v. Livermore, 72 id. 174, 182; Pope v. O’Hara, 48 id. 446, 455; Suydam v. Dunton, 84 Hun, 506; Crain v. Fox, 16 Barb. 184), and accordingly to this extent plaintiff is entitled to judgment herein, without costs. Portions of findings inconsistent herewith are reversed and appropriate findings in conformity herewith will be made. Since respondent concedes that she has no right to use the right of way for the purpose of parcel E, no adjudication with reference thereto is necessary. Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Hagarty, Seeger and Carswell, JJ., concur. Settle order on notice.

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

Judgment reversed upon the law and the facts, with costs. On the undisputed facts the former means of user by parcel C of its right of way over parcel D has been abandoned (Corning v. Gould, 16 Wend. 531; Welsh v. Taylor, 134 N. Y. 450, 457; Cartwright v. Maplesden, 53 id. 622; Lattimer v. Livermore, 72 id. 174, 182; Pope v. O’Hara, 48 id. 446, 455; Suydam v. Dunton, 84 Hun, 506; Crain v. Fox, 16 Barb. 184), and accordingly to this extent plaintiff is entitled to judgment herein, without costs. Portions of findings inconsistent herewith are reversed and appropriate findings in conformity herewith will be made. Since respondent concedes that she has no right to use the right of way for the purpose of parcel E, no adjudication with reference thereto is necessary. Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Hagarty, Seeger and Carswell, JJ., concur. Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

223 A.D. 846, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/magner-v-honeyman-nyappdiv-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack