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 Application of the Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of the City of New York to Acquire Title to Land for the Purpose of Opening Fordham Road. John B. Haskin, Jr., Appellant; The City of New York, Respondent, 1902 — 172 N.Y. 653 · caselaw · US
Corporations
In the Matter of the Application of the Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of the City of New York to Acquire Title to Land for the Purpose of Opening Fordham Road. John B. Haskin, Jr., Appellant; The City of New York, Respondent
172 N.Y. 653·New York Court of Appeals·1902·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 Application of the Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of the City of New York to Acquire Title to Land for the Purpose of Opening Fordham Road. John B. Haskin, Jr., Appellant; The City of New York, Respondent.
Matter of Mayor, etc., of New York, 74 App. Div. 343, appeal dismissed.
(Argued November 12, 1902;
decided December 2, 1902.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division' of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered August 6, 1902, which modified, and affirmed as modified, an order of Special Term denying an application to vacate proceedings for the acquisition of certain real estate in the city of New York, and confirming the report of commissioners of estimate and assessment.
Abel Crook for appellant.
George L. Rives, Corporation Counsel (Theodore Connoly, John P. Dunn and Thomas C. Blake of counsel), for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal dismissed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Martin and Cullen, JJ. Absent: Yann, J.