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 New York, Respondent, Relative to Acquiring Title to Rockwood Street from Walton Avenue to Grand Boulevard and Concourse. Robert H. M. Ferguson et al., Appellants, 1906 — 183 N.Y. 571 · caselaw · US
Corporations
In the Matter of the Application of the City of New York, Respondent, Relative to Acquiring Title to Rockwood Street from Walton Avenue to Grand Boulevard and Concourse. Robert H. M. Ferguson et al., Appellants
183 N.Y. 571·New York Court of Appeals·1906·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, Respondent, Relative to Acquiring Title to Rockwood Street from Walton Avenue to Grand Boulevard and Concourse. Robert H. M. Ferguson et al., Appellants.
(Argued January 8, 1906;
decided January 23, 1906.)
Matter of City of New York (Rockwood St.), 107 App. Div. 612, affirmed.
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered September 23, 19Q5, which affirmed an order of Special Term confirming the report of commissioners of estimate and assessment in the above-entitled proceedings.
John C. Shaw, Fordham Morris, William Grossman and William Arrowsmith for appellants.
John J. Delany, Corporation Counsel (Theodore Connoly, John P. Dunn and Thomas C. Blake of counsel), for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., O’Brien, Haight, Yann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Hisoook, JJ.