People ex rel. Lynch v. Manhattan Railway Co.

20 Abb. N. Cas. 393
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedApril 15, 1888
StatusPublished

This text of 20 Abb. N. Cas. 393 (People ex rel. Lynch v. Manhattan Railway Co.) 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
People ex rel. Lynch v. Manhattan Railway Co., 20 Abb. N. Cas. 393 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1888).

Opinion

Barrett, J.

The application is wholly without merit. The relator seeks to apply the charter provision, which requires the department of public works to keep the streets clear of obstruction, to an alleged infringement of her private rights by the elevated railway. By a mere motion to compel the department to remove structures which, at the present time and under existing circumstances, have not the slightest bearing upon any practical question, she seeks by a short cut what would be the result of a successful action in equity. She has a remedy at law and a remedy in equity. She needs no mandamus, and she is subjected to no present loss or even inconvenience. Besides, the right is not clear, and where that is the case, the party cannot have mandamus, but must resort to an action. There is no public duty imposed upon the department of public works under such circumstances. It cannot treat these structures, erected under claim of legislative authority, upon vacant lots -in a substantially uninhabited part of the city, as it would an ash barrel or a news stand in a crowded street. Questions of legal right cannot bo settled in this summary way, and the application should be denied, with costs.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 Abb. N. Cas. 393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-lynch-v-manhattan-railway-co-nysupct-1888.