Matter of City of New York

78 N.E. 531, 185 N.Y. 607, 1906 N.Y. LEXIS 1058
New York Court of Appeals·Decided June 19, 1906·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

While we do not assent to the doctrine that the right of the pier owners to an exclusive use of the pier as a shedded pier, and to be relieved of the burden of having vessels put in at the wharf was beyond legislative repeal or modification, still, as at the time this property was acquired *608 by the city no such repeal liad been made, the value of the property was to be estimated under the existing conditions of the law.

While the report states that the award was made upon the theory of the right being in perpetuity, still the entire record discloses that it was made in accordance with the true rights of the parties.

The order should be affirmed, with costs.

Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Edward T. Bartlett, Werner and Hiscock, JJ., concur; Chase, J., absent.

Order affirmed.

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

Matter of City of New York, 78 N.E. 531, 185 N.Y. 607, 1906 N.Y. LEXIS 1058 (N.Y. 1906).

78 N.E. 531 (Matter of City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of City of New York (Pier Old No. 49)
124 N.E. 148 (New York Court of Appeals, 1919)
In re the City of New York
185 A.D. 539 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1918)
In re City of New York
138 A.D. 186 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1910)
In re Piers Old Nos. 16 & 17, East River
122 N.Y.S. 1034 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1910)
In re Commissioner of Public Works
135 A.D. 561 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1909)
In re Piers, Old Nos. 19, 20, East River
102 N.Y.S. 667 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1907)