New York Supreme Court, 1894

Henney v. Brooklyn Elevated Railroad

Henney v. Brooklyn Elevated Railroad
New York Supreme Court · Decided February 15, 1894 · Cullen, Dykman, Peatt
82 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 543

Counsel

Wm. H. Oohen, for the appellants., Stephen M. Hoye and Francis Russell Whitney, for the respondent.

Henney v. Brooklyn Elevated Railroad

Opinion of the Court

Dykman, J.:

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff against the defendant.

*545Tbe action was for tbe recovery of damages to property resulting from the construction and operation of tbe defendant’s elevated railroad and to restrain its operation.

Tbe trial was before a judge without a jury and we find no error in the' record.

The portion of tbe judgment which provides for an injunction would be erroneous if it was absolute and tbe proceedings for tbe condemnation of tbe property bad been instituted previous to tbe commencement of tbe action.

.But such proceedings were instituted subsequently to tbe commencement of tbe action, and the restraining portion of the judgment will become inoperative upon the payment of the sum of money awarded.

Under such circumstances we see no reason for a reversal of the judgment.

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

CulleN and Peatt, JJ., concurred.-

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.