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.
The People of the State of New York ex rel. John P. O'Brien et al., as Receivers of the New York and Westchester Water Company, Respondents, v. James P. Keating, as Commissioner of the Department of Highways of, the City of New York, Appellant, 1901 — 166 N.Y. 601 · caselaw · US
Corporations
The People of the State of New York ex rel. John P. O'Brien et al., as Receivers of the New York and Westchester Water Company, Respondents, v. James P. Keating, as Commissioner of the Department of Highways of, the City of New York, Appellant
166 N.Y. 601·New York Court of Appeals·1901·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
The People of the State of New York ex rel. John P. O’Brien et al., as Receivers of the New York and Westchester Water Company, Respondents, v. James P. Keating, as Commissioner of the Department of Highways of, the City of New York, Appellant.
People ex rel. O’Brien v. Keating, 55 App. Div. 555, affirmed.
(Argued February 26, 1901;
decided March 19, 1901.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 12,1900, affirming an order of Special Term granting a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus directing the defendant to issue to the relators a permit to open a certain street in the city of New York.
John Whalen, Corporation Counsel (Theodore Connoly and Terence Farley of counsel), for appellant.
W. C. Prime and Henry H. Pierce for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Martin, Vann and Landon, JJ.