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.
Corporations
In the Matter of the Application of the City of New York, Relative to Acquiring Certain Lands in the Borough of Manhattan. Peter D. Strauch, Appellant; City of New York et al., Respondents
179 N.Y. 598·New York Court of Appeals·1904·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 City of New York, Relative to Acquiring Certain Lands in the Borough of Manhattan. Peter D. Strauch, Appellant; City of New York et al., Respondents.
iMatter of Oity of New York, 90 App. Div. 606, affirmed.
(Argued November 14, 1904;
decided November 29, 1904.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered January 14, 1904, which affirmed an order of Special Term confirming the report of commissioners of estimate and assessment in proceedings to acquire title to certain lands required for the improvement of the water front in the citv of New York.
Henry B. Twonibly for appellant.
John J. Helctny, Corporation Counsel {Theodore ConnoVy and Charles D. Olendorf), for City of New York, respondent.
Charles A. Peabody for William Waldorf Astor, respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Vann and Werner, JJ.