# Board of Hudson River Regulating District v. Fonda, Johnstown & Gloversville Railroad

> Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · April 5, 1928 · 223 A.D. 358

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5300208

## Case

- **Full name:** Board of Hudson River Regulating District v. Fonda, Johnstown and Gloversville Railroad Company and Another
- **Court:** Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- **Decided:** April 5, 1928
- **Citations:** 223 A.D. 358; 228 N.Y.S. 686; 1928 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6215
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Hill
- **Judges:** Hasbrouck, Hill
- **Cited by:** 4 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Yellow flag:** Modified by Hudson River R. Dist. v. F., J. G.R.R. Co., 249 N.Y. 445 (1928).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5300208

## Opinion text

Hill, J.
(concurring). I concur in the result. Neither the commerce clause of the Federal Constitution nor the Transportation Act of 1920 is in any wise involved. “ The power to take private property, contrary to the decision of the owner, for a public use reaches back of all constitutional provisions.” (Matter of City of Rochester v. Holden, 224 N. Y. 386, 392 .) “ * * * The right of every State to authorize the appropriation of every description of property for a public use is one of those inherent powers which belong to State governments, without which they could not well perform their great functions. It is a power not surrendered to the United States and is untouched by any of the provisions of the Federal Constitution, provided there be due process of law, that is, a law authorizing it, and provision made for compensation. This power extends to tangibles and intangibles alike. A chose in action, a charter, or any kind of contract, are, along with land and movables, within the sweep of this sovereign authority.” (Cincinnati v. Louisville & Nashville R. R. Co., 223 U. S. 390, 400 .) “ This right of appropriating private property to a public use is one of the powers vital to the public welfare of every self-governing community.” It is a power “ incident to sovereignty,” which “ belongs to every independent government.” (Id. 404. See, also, Pennsylvania Hospital v. Philadelphia, 245 U. S. 20 ; Georgia v. Chattanooga, 264 id. 472.)
Davis, J., concurs.
Judgment and final order affirmed, with costs.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5300208. Public record. Not legal advice.