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 City of Rochester to Acquire Right to draw Water from Hemlock and Canadice Lakes, 1890 — 121 N.Y. 682 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the Application of the City of Rochester to Acquire Right to draw Water from Hemlock and Canadice Lakes
121 N.Y. 682·New York Court of Appeals·1890·NY
All concur.
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 City of Rochester to Acquire Right to draw Water from Hemlock and Canadice Lakes.
(Argued April 29, 1890;
decided June 3, 1890.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Corn’t in the fifth judicial department, made January 24,1890, which reversed an order of the Special Term, denying a motion by Alexander M. Holden to he allowed to intervene and file a notice of his claim upon the award granted, and which granted the motion.
Theodore Bacon for appellant.
William F. Cogswell for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.