Rose Roller & Howilo Real Estate Co. v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rose Roller & Howilo Real Estate Co. v. City of New York

250 A.D. 778, 294 N.Y.S. 185, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8966

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 19, 1937·Published

Opinion

Action under article 15 of the Real Property Law, to compel the determination of a claim to real property, the parcel affected being a triangular gore at the southeast corner of Sixteenth avenue and Forty-fourth street, Brooklyn, N. Y. Judgment for the defendant unanimously affirmed, with costs. The plaintiffs did not establish title in themselves. (Stirnweis v. Cacioppo, 258 N. Y. 68; Vanderveer Crossings v. Rapalje, 133 App. Div. 203; D’Anna v. City of New York, 246 id. 753; Real Prop. Law, §§ 500, 501, subd. 1.) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Taylor, JJ.

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

Action under article 15 of the Real Property Law, to compel the determination of a claim to real property, the parcel affected being a triangular gore at the southeast corner of Sixteenth avenue and Forty-fourth street, Brooklyn, N. Y. Judgment for the defendant unanimously affirmed, with costs. The plaintiffs did not establish title in themselves. (Stirnweis v. Cacioppo, 258 N. Y. 68; Vanderveer Crossings v. Rapalje, 133 App. Div. 203; D’Anna v. City of New York, 246 id. 753; Real Prop. Law, §§ 500, 501, subd. 1.) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Taylor, JJ.

Rose Roller & Howilo Real Estate Co. v. City of New York, 250 A.D. 778, 294 N.Y.S. 185, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8966 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

250 A.D. 778 (Rose Roller & Howilo Real Estate Co. v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related