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.
General
In the Matter of the Application of the Boston and Albany Railroad Company, Respondent, under Section 62 of the Railroad Law; Town of Kinderhook, Appellant
170 N.Y. 619·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 Boston and Albany Railroad Company, Respondent, under Section 62 of the Railroad Law; Town of Kinderhook, Appellant.
Matter of Boston & Albany B. B. Oo., 64 App. Div. 257, affirmed.
(Argued March 24, 1902;
decided April 8, 1902.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial■ department, entered September 18, 1901, which affirmed a decision of the board of railroad commissioners directing the closing of a grade crossing at Niverville in the town of Kinderhook.
E. E. Eardcr for appellant.
A. E. Ga/rdenier for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Bartlett, Cullen and Werner, JJ. Not sitting : Haight, J.