Priola v. City of New York

237 A.D. 827

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the ground that the plaintiff established a prima jade [828]*828ease that the street in question was a public street, and that the defendant offered no evidence to the contrary. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty and Davis, JJ., concur; Carswell, J., dissents on authority of Nichols Copper Co. v. Connolly (208 App. Div. 667; affd., 240 N. Y. 596), and eases cited therein at page 677.

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

Priola v. City of New York, 237 A.D. 827 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

237 A.D. 827 (Priola v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nichols Copper Company v. Connolly
148 N.E. 720 (New York Court of Appeals, 1925)
Nichols Copper Co. v. Connolly
208 A.D. 667 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1924)