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, Appellant, Relative to Acquiring Title to Lands Required for the Purpose of Opening Vanderbilt Avenue West. In the Matter of the Claim of Elizabeth Ransford, Respondent, 1907 — 189 N.Y. 551 · caselaw · US
Corporations
In the Matter of the Application of the Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of the City of New York, Appellant, Relative to Acquiring Title to Lands Required for the Purpose of Opening Vanderbilt Avenue West. In the Matter of the Claim of Elizabeth Ransford, Respondent
189 N.Y. 551·New York Court of Appeals·1907·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, Appellant, Relative to Acquiring Title to Lands Required for the Purpose of Opening Vanderbilt Avenue West. In the Matter of the Claim of Elizabeth Ransford, Respondent.
Matter of Mayor, etc., of N. T. (Vanderbilt Are. West), 119 App. Div. 882, affirmed.
(Argued October 2, 1907;
decided October 22, 1907.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered May 24, 1907, which affirmed an order of Special Term confirming the report of commissioners of estimate and assessment in the above-entitled proceeding.
Francis K. Pendleton, Corporation Counsel (Theodore Connoly, John P. Dunn and Thomas C. Blake of counsel), for appellant.
8. Livingston Samuels for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., O’Brien, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Vann, Hiscook and Chase, JJ.