Matter of Garvey

77 N.Y. 523, 1879 N.Y. LEXIS 816
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 17, 1879
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 77 N.Y. 523 (Matter of Garvey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Matter of Garvey, 77 N.Y. 523, 1879 N.Y. LEXIS 816 (N.Y. 1879).

Opinion

Danfoeth, J.

In 1869 that portion of Madison avenue described in the petition was “graded, curbed, guttered and flagged” in pursuance of an ordinance and the petitioner paid therefor. The side-walk is. twelve feet wide and the improvement then made consisted of a single strip of flagging four feet wide running "through the center of the sidewalk. The ordinance now in question provides that on the same premises “ curb and gutter stones be set and reset and the side-walks be flagged and reflagged where not already done.” ' This ordinance was not petitioned for as required in certain cases by section 115 of Laws of 1873, chapter 335, as amended by section 22 of chapter 757, Laws of 1873. I think the case before us falls within the statute. A sidewalk furnished with a stone-way four feet in width may properly be said to be flagged although the whole surface is not covered. It was one mode of improvement and furnished a convenient and sufficient way for travel. The statute last referred to permits the owner to judge of the necessity or expediency of a new, or better, or different improvement and unless it applies to a case like the present the city may pave one-third of the walk at one time, one-third at another, and afterwards the rest. This would be contrary to the plain reading and obvious purpose of the statute. The city having once determined the character and extent of the pavement and laid it, can have no farther jurisdiction over the flagging or pavement of that side-walk until a petition has been presented therefor “by a majority of the owners of the property on the line of the proposed improvement.” (Statute of 1873 [supra].)

The order should be affirmed, with costs.

All concur, except Bapallo, J., absent.

Order affirmed.

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

Related

People ex rel. Keller v. City of Buffalo
77 Misc. 532 (New York Supreme Court, 1912)
City of New York v. Brown
27 Misc. 218 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1899)
Dickinson v. City of Detroit
69 N.W. 728 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1897)
Matter of Petition of Smith
2 N.E. 52 (New York Court of Appeals, 1885)
In re Smith
67 How. Pr. 501 (New York Supreme Court, 1884)
In re Blodgett
34 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 12 (New York Supreme Court, 1882)
In the Matter of the Petition of Brady
85 N.Y. 268 (New York Court of Appeals, 1881)
In the Matter of Catharine A. Grube
81 N.Y. 139 (New York Court of Appeals, 1880)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
77 N.Y. 523, 1879 N.Y. LEXIS 816, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-garvey-ny-1879.