Opinion · New York Court of Appeals

City of Brooklyn v. . New York Ferry Co.

87 N.Y. 204

Type
Opinion
Court
New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction
New York
Date
1881-12-13
Topic
general

Danforth, J. Upon the facts found by the trial court, the plaintiff has no right of action. The structure now in course of erection by the defendant is upon its own property and within the pier line established by law. It interferes with no right of the plaintiff, and if the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant is sound, the city, by the mere extension of its streets, will deprive the owners of the upland' and water front of the enjoyment and improvement of their own premises. A right to do this should be made very plain be *209 fore a court of equity can be induced to interfere.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed City of Brooklyn v. . New York Ferry Co.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
3 opinions
CITY OF BROOKLYNv. NEW YORK FERRY CO.,87 N.Y. 204(1881)
THE CITY OF BROOKLYN, Appellant,v. THE NEW YORK FERRY COMPANY,
Respondent.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
Argued November 29, 1881
Decided December 13, 1881
Page 205
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.]Page 206

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.]Page 207
William C. De Wittfor appellant.Page 208Joshua M. Van Cottfor respondent.
DANFORTH, J.
Upon the facts found by the trial court, the plaintiff has no right of action. The structure now in course of erection by the defendant is upon its own property and within the pier line established by law. It interferes with no right of the plaintiff, and if the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant is sound, the city, by the mere extension of its streets, will deprive the owners of the upland and water front of the enjoyment and improvement of their own premises. A right to do this should be made very plain bePage 209fore a court of equity can be induced to interfere. There is an absence of any express power given to the plaintiff, and there is nothing in the statutes referred to (Laws of 1854, chap. 384, § 13, sub. 2; Laws of 1873, chap. 863, page 1300, § 13, sub. 4) from which it can be implied.

The authority there conferred is, "to regulate wharves and piers owned by the city" or matters connected therewith, or business thereon. These things are not in question. The object of the action is to exclude the defendant from its own property. No good reason has been shown for such interference, and the court below properly refused its aid.

The judgment should be affirmed.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.