Urbano v. Hallenbeck
This text of 163 A.D. 844 (Urbano v. Hallenbeck) 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.
Opinion
The facts disclosed in the complaint and affidavit, which are entirely undenied by the defendant, show a continual trespass in front of the plaintiff’s premises and are sufficient to constitute a nuisance. Plaintiff was entitled to an injunction restraining such continual trespass and nuisance, and the order is, therefore, reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, with ten dollars costs. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Clarke, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
163 A.D. 844, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/urbano-v-hallenbeck-nyappdiv-1914.