Torts · MBE-tested
Victor Urbano, Appellant, v. Harry C. Hallenbeck and U. T. Hungerford Brass and Copper Company, Respondents
163 A.D. 844·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1914·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
Victor Urbano, Appellant, v. Harry C. Hallenbeck and U. T. Hungerford Brass and Copper Company, Respondents.
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, entered in the New York county clerk’s office on the 11th day of July, 1913, denying a motion for an injunction during the pendency of the action.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The facts disclosed in the complaint and affidavit, which are entirely undenied by the defendant, show a continual trespass in front of the plaintiff’s premises and are sufficient to constitute a nuisance. Plaintiff was entitled to an injunction restraining such continual trespass and nuisance, and the order is, therefore, reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, with ten dollars costs. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Clarke, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs.