Stuart v. Flower City Peat Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stuart v. Flower City Peat Co.

20 A.D.2d 753, 247 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4309

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 20 A.D.2d 753 (Stuart v. Flower City Peat 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

Stuart v. Flower City Peat Co., 20 A.D.2d 753, 247 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4309 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment insofar as appealed from unanimously modified in accordance with the memorandum and as modified affirmed, with costs to [754]*754appellants. Memorandum: The judgment is based on the court’s determination that plaintiffs are estopped from complaining of defendant’s use of the drainage ditch and upon its further determination that the ditch is a natural water course. The record does not support the finding that plaintiff Helen Stuart Lowery is so estopped. The judgment should, therefore, be modified by deleting her name from the last paragraph of the judgment and by adding thereto a provision that she be enjoined from interfering with defendant’s unrestricted use of the ditch as it existed in October, 1956. (Appeal by plaintiffs from certain parts of a judgment of Livingston Trial Term in an action for an injunction.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Henry, Noonan and Del Vecchio, JJ.

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

Judgment insofar as appealed from unanimously modified in accordance with the memorandum and as modified affirmed, with costs to [754]*754appellants. Memorandum: The judgment is based on the court’s determination that plaintiffs are estopped from complaining of defendant’s use of the drainage ditch and upon its further determination that the ditch is a natural water course. The record does not support the finding that plaintiff Helen Stuart Lowery is so estopped. The judgment should, therefore, be modified by deleting her name from the last paragraph of the judgment and by adding thereto a provision that she be enjoined from interfering with defendant’s unrestricted use of the ditch as it existed in October, 1956. (Appeal by plaintiffs from certain parts of a judgment of Livingston Trial Term in an action for an injunction.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Henry, Noonan and Del Vecchio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 753, 247 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stuart-v-flower-city-peat-co-nyappdiv-1964.