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 Petition of The Terminal Railway of Buffalo, Respondent, as to its Highway Crossings in the Town of West Seneca, Appellant. In the Matter of the Petition of The Terminal Railway of Buffalo, Respondent, as to its Highway Crossings in the Town of Cheektowaga, Appellant, 1908 — 192 N.Y. 534 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the Petition of The Terminal Railway of Buffalo, Respondent, as to its Highway Crossings in the Town of West Seneca, Appellant. In the Matter of the Petition of The Terminal Railway of Buffalo, Respondent, as to its Highway Crossings in the Town of Cheektowaga, Appellant
192 N.Y. 534·New York Court of Appeals·1908·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 Petition of The Terminal Railway of Buffalo, Respondent, as to its Highway Crossings in the Town of West Seneca, Appellant. In the Matter of the Petition of The Terminal Railway of Buffalo, Respondent, as to its Highway Crossings in the Town of Cheektowaga, Appellant.
Matter of Terminal Railway of Buffalo, 133 App. Div. 59, 896, affirmed.
(Argued March 31, 1908;
decided April 14, 1908.)
Appeal in each of the above-entitled proceedings from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered November 15, 1907, which affirmed a determination of the board of railroad commissioners granting the petitioner the right to cross certain streets and roads.
John W. Fisher for appellants.
Charles A. Pooley for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed in each case, with one bill of costs and disbursements in both cases ; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Vann, Werner, Hiscock and Chase, JJ.