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 Department of Public Parks of the City of New York, Relative to Acquiring Title to Certain Lands for Public Parks and Parkways, under and pursuant to the Provisions of Chapter 522 of the Laws of 1884. In the Matter of Thomas Wilson, Parcel 377, Pelham Bay Park. Augustus Lawrence, Appellant; The City of New York, Respondent, 1900 — 164 N.Y. 574 · caselaw · US
Corporations
In the Matter of the Application of The Department of Public Parks of the City of New York, Relative to Acquiring Title to Certain Lands for Public Parks and Parkways, under and pursuant to the Provisions of Chapter 522 of the Laws of 1884. In the Matter of Thomas Wilson, Parcel 377, Pelham Bay Park. Augustus Lawrence, Appellant; The City of New York, Respondent
164 N.Y. 574·New York Court of Appeals·1900·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 Department of Public Parks of the City of New York, Relative to Acquiring Title to Certain Lands for Public Parks and Parkways, under and pursuant to the Provisions of Chapter 522 of the Laws of 1884. In the Matter of Thomas Wilson, Parcel 377, Pelham Bay Park. Augustus Lawrence, Appellant; The City of New York, Respondent.
Matter of Depa/rtment of Public Pcerks, 52 App. Div. 630, affirmed.
(Argued October 2, 1900;
decided October 16, 1900.)
Appeal from an order . of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 25, 1900, denying a motion for an order modifying the report of the referee in the above-entitled special proceeding- and confirming said report.
George H. Corey for appellant.
John Whalen, Corporation Counsel (Theodore Connoly and Charles L>. Olendorf of counsel), for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Martin, Yann and Landon, JJ.