McBrair v. Rockland Light & Power Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McBrair v. Rockland Light & Power Co.

240 A.D. 912

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

DecidedNovember 15, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 240 A.D. 912 (McBrair v. Rockland Light & Power Co.) 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

McBrair v. Rockland Light & Power Co., 240 A.D. 912 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying motion to dismiss the complaint affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. In our opinion the grant by the Legislature to the Delaware and Hudson Canal Company was that of a corporeal hereditament and not a right in the nature of an easement; and a grant thereof to the plaintiff [913]*913subsequent to a grant to the defendant, and the defendant’s possession under its grant, is within the purview of section 260 of the Beal Property Law. However, the complaint is not so positive in its allegations of what the defendant acquired as to justify a dismissal of it, and in our opinion there should be a trial of the issues followed by appropriate findings. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

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

Order denying motion to dismiss the complaint affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. In our opinion the grant by the Legislature to the Delaware and Hudson Canal Company was that of a corporeal hereditament and not a right in the nature of an easement; and a grant thereof to the plaintiff [913]*913subsequent to a grant to the defendant, and the defendant’s possession under its grant, is within the purview of section 260 of the Beal Property Law. However, the complaint is not so positive in its allegations of what the defendant acquired as to justify a dismissal of it, and in our opinion there should be a trial of the issues followed by appropriate findings. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

240 A.D. 912, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcbrair-v-rockland-light-power-co-nyappdiv-1933.