Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
In the Matter of the Opening of Lexington Avenue, between Ninety-seventh and One Hundred and Second Streets in the City of New York; In re Petition of James A. Deering, Appellant; John Schreyer, Respondent, 1898 — 157 N.Y. 678 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the Opening of Lexington Avenue, between Ninety-seventh and One Hundred and Second Streets in the City of New York; In re Petition of James A. Deering, Appellant; John Schreyer, Respondent
157 N.Y. 678·New York Court of Appeals·1898·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
In the Matter of the Opening of Lexington Avenue, between Ninety-seventh and One Hundred and Second Streets in the City of New York. In re Petition of James A. Deering, Appellant; John Schreyer, Respondent.
Matter of Lexington Ave., 30 App. Div. 602, affirmed.
(Argued October 5, 1898;
decided October 25, 1898.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered July 5, 1898, reversing an order of Special Term confirming the report of a referee and directing the payment to the appellant of a certain portion of an award made in proceedings to open Lexington avenue in the city of New York.
Clarence L. Barber for appellant.
Alex. Thain for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur, except Haight and Martin, Jj., not voting..