Schuyler Steam Towboat Line v. Newton

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Schuyler Steam Towboat Line v. Newton

21 F. Cas. 762, 21 Alb. Law J. 82

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

DecidedDecember 15, 1879

StatusPublished

This text of 21 F. Cas. 762 (Schuyler Steam Towboat Line v. Newton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Schuyler Steam Towboat Line v. Newton, 21 F. Cas. 762, 21 Alb. Law J. 82 (circtsdny 1879).

Pincite

Opinion

BLATCHFORD, Circuit Judge.

I think on the whole case before me the plaintiff has not succeeded in establishing its right to a preliminary injunction. The general plan of the improvement which the defendant is carrying out in respect to the dike across the existing eastern channel was laid before congress, and it therefore made the appropriations it made by the acts of 1878-1879 [20 Stat. 159.363], “for improving the Hudson river,” the money “to be expended under the direction of the secretary of war,” and a specific contract for constructing the dike is shown to have been approved by the secretary of war. The weight of the evidence is, that what is sought to be done will, when completed, be an improvement of the navigation of the river and that the means adopted to that end are not improper. The experience of the past contributes largely to the belief that what is now sought to be done will improve the navigation. On the present state of affairs no injunction ought to be granted, and the temporary injunction must be dissolved.

Motion denied.

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

BLATCHFORD, Circuit Judge.

I think on the whole case before me the plaintiff has not succeeded in establishing its right to a preliminary injunction. The general plan of the improvement which the defendant is carrying out in respect to the dike across the existing eastern channel was laid before congress, and it therefore made the appropriations it made by the acts of 1878-1879 [20 Stat. 159.363], “for improving the Hudson river,” the money “to be expended under the direction of the secretary of war,” and a specific contract for constructing the dike is shown to have been approved by the secretary of war. The weight of the evidence is, that what is sought to be done will, when completed, be an improvement of the navigation of the river and that the means adopted to that end are not improper. The experience of the past contributes largely to the belief that what is now sought to be done will improve the navigation. On the present state of affairs no injunction ought to be granted, and the temporary injunction must be dissolved.

Motion denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 F. Cas. 762, 21 Alb. Law J. 82, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schuyler-steam-towboat-line-v-newton-circtsdny-1879.