Case law

Kinnan v. The Forty-Second Street Railway Co.

1 Misc. 457 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jan 15, 1893

This is the established doctrine.” … Y. 223 , it was clearly enunciated that none of the equitable powers of the courts under the Constitution are to be taken away by implication.

Genet v. President, Managers & Co. of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.

69 N.Y. St. Rep. 357 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jun 15, 1895

Rep. 53 , which in any way qualifies or limits what was actually-decided by the second division. … The contract in question contains the three elements stated by the experts, and is, acccording to their testimony, clearly a grant in fee.

Bowman v. Tallman

2 Rob. 385 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jun 30, 1864

In such a case, the court clearly is not to act as a court cutting off contingent remainder men, as by a fine and recovery, which may not be necessary, and clearly would be improper, in order to benefit the first takers, … No exception was taken to instruction as thus qualified.

Central Crosstown Railroad v. Twenty-third Street Railroad

54 How. Pr. 168 · The Superior Court of New York City · Nov 15, 1877

It grants no exclusive privilege, immunity or franchise. The right to lay down tracks had already been granted before the constitutional amendments took effect. … There is, moreover, no sufficient evidence before me to establish either alleged ground of forfeiture.

Hazelton v. Colburn

2 Abb. Pr. 199 · The Superior Court of New York City · Nov 15, 1863

Very few of the cases have undertaken to define the period which may elapse between the giving and presentment ; arid probably no general rule can be established. … It is settled by numerous and uniform decisions, that to make a waiver, however clearly proved, obligatory upon the party making it, it is indispensable that it should be made with full knowledge of all the facts; that is

Platt v. Gilchrist

3 Sandf. 118 · The Superior Court of New York City · Sep 22, 1849

Allen, that he must be considered as intending to qualify and restrict the general expressions it contained, and as meaning to extend the interference of the court to a case like the present. In the case of Leggett v. … And it would certainly seem to be contrary to established principles. Courts of equity do not make new contracts for parties, or relieve them from the effects of those which they have fairly and deliberately made.

Palmer v. Mayor of New York

1 Duer 451 · The Superior Court of New York City · Feb 5, 1853

If the members of the Common Council are entitled to the immunity which they claim, exactly the same immunity, and exactly upon the same grounds, may be claimed, and justly claimed by all, who manage officially the concerns … It may be that the Corporation has no power whatever either to establish itself, or to grant to others, the privilege of establishing a railway in any of the public streets in the city; and whether they have or not, is a

Ross v. Harden

12 Jones & S. 26 · The Superior Court of New York City · Apr 1, 1878

It remained there from March 8 to March 14, when it was handed over to the defendants, who had then qualified as the legal representatives of its deceased owner. … The words used are clearly susceptible of a construction which would give them immediate effect.

Savage v. Murphy

8 Bosw. 75 · The Superior Court of New York City · Mar 9, 1861

It clearly establishes that there was not an actual, much less a continued, change of possession of the assigned property. … Two points I think can very clearly be made out : First. As it is declared by Yelvebtcx, J., in Upton v. Basset, (Cro.

Groesbeeck v. Dunscomb

41 How. Pr. 302 · The Superior Court of New York City · Feb 15, 1871

If the plaintiff desires to •establish his claim to be a corporator, or to preach in the parish church, or to have a receiver appointed to take •charge of the corporate property, he clearly cannot have ■such relief in an … The act provides that “ the persons qualified to vote at elections for church officers shall be male persons of full age, who shall have belonged to the church or congregation for the last twelve nionths preceding the election

Palmer v. Foley

44 How. Pr. 308 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jan 15, 1873

view of all this, it is .easy to see that if the plaintiff shall, either wilfully or negligently, permit the moneys in the treasuries to be withdrawn therefrom by any one except himself, or by a properly appointed and duly qualified … fact conferred upon the comptroller, if upon an examination of the entire act of 1870 in connection with former enactments in par materia, and the surrounding circumstances as shown by the . vidence before the court, it clearly

Roberts v. Randel

5 How. Pr. 327 · The Superior Court of New York City · Jan 15, 1851

We have examined the subject with much care and are clearly of the opinion that the plaintiff is not entitled to the remedy which he claimed and which was granted to him by the order at chambers. … That order is one of the “provisional remedies,” established by the seventh title of the Code.

Davidson v. Mayor of New York

2 Rob. 230 · The Superior Court of New York City · Apr 30, 1864

If I have succeeded in establishing those propositions, then- it necessarily follows, that no vested right of the city has been disturbed, nor has the obligation of any contract been impaired. … In the Charles River Bridge case, ( 11 Peters, 420 ,) the right of the legislature to interfere and take away a vested right, was clearly and distinctly recognized and decided.

Bennett v. Egan

52 N.Y. St. Rep. 437 · The Superior Court of New York City · May 1, 1893

In the case of an express and special contract the broker, in order to recover his commission from the vendor, must establish that he performed the special contract in every particular by producing to the vendor a party able … At most it was a contract for a contract, for the whole instrument must be read together, in which case the opening words relating to buying and selling are clearly qualified by “pay in hand * * * fifty dollars to bind contract

Harding v. Barney

7 Bosw. 353 · The Superior Court of New York City · Nov 10, 1860

possibly have received the money and issued the draft and no such entry have been made; but the entry could not have been made unless they had issued the draft which the plaintiff received; so the entry, if proved, directly established … -f view, and was only admissible if unobjected • : -■ - .c-arsay evidence of a material fact, it was clearly duty of an objecting party, to object to hearsay testimony when it is given, and not to wait for the charge of the

Cisco v. Roberts

19 Bosw. 494 · The Superior Court of New York City · Apr 28, 1860

Section 13: Establishes the rates of Pilotage, and provides as follows: “When any ship or vessel, bound to the port of Hew York, and boarded by any Pilot licensed by this Board, at such distance to the southward or eastward … The Act does not in any wise relate to sailing vessels, and in so far as they are concerned the State system is clearly unaffected.

Wetmore v. Campbell

2 Sandf. 341 · The Superior Court of New York City · Feb 24, 1849

We think this clearly means, the occupant assessed 6as such in the list by name, and not any person not named, who may chance to be occupying the premises when the collector visits them. … The authority to issue such a roving distress warrant, may be granted, if the legislature deem it necessary; but it cannot be established by remote inference, still less from its expediency in a given case.

Board of Commissioners of Pilots v. Vanderbilt

2 Rob. 367 · The Superior Court of New York City · May 21, 1864

I am clearly of opinion that the board failed to perform the acts necessary to subject the defendant to the penalty claimed. … Baker, in 31st Barb, that the rights of property of every description are qualified and restricted by the well settled rule that they shall be so exercised as not to injure others, but in cases of great and imminent danger

Cockey v. Hurd

14 Abb. Pr. 183 · The Superior Court of New York City · Feb 15, 1873

can be perceived upon grounds of public policy, why a party who asks a favor from the court upon his own affidavit, should, not be called upon by his adversary, in case of necessity, to make to the court explanatory or qualifying … We are, therefore, clearly of opinion, that the power contended for by the appellants exists in the court.

Speyers v. Lambert

6 Abb. Pr. 309 · The Superior Court of New York City · May 15, 1869

The evidence shows clearly that, before renting the premises, the plaintiff required security for the rent; Mrs. … Laws of 1813, ch. 4, p. 78, but properly the act of 1787), which was identical with the statute as it stands since the amendment of 1863; that therefore the amendment of 1863 merely re-established the rule of law as it existed