24 N.Y. 345, Albany N.R. Co. v. Brownell

Citation24 N.Y. 345
Party NameTHE ALBANY NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY v. BROWNELL et al.
Case DateMarch 01, 1862
CourtNew York Court of Appeals

Page 345

24 N.Y. 345

THE ALBANY NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY

v.

BROWNELL et al.

New York Court of Appeal

March 1, 1862

Page 346

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 347

COUNSEL

William A. Beach, for the appellants.

Orlando Meads, for the respondents.

DENIO, J.

I am of opinion, in the first place, that the plaintiffs were not entitled to relief, on account of the alleged irregularities in laying out the road. If they were such as to deprive the commissioners of highways of jurisdiction, as is argued by the plaintiffs' counsel, still an injunction was not a proper remedy. It may be that, upon the facts proved, the order of the commissioners in laying out the road would be void, and that all persons acting under their orders in opening

Page 348

it would be trespassers. But the defect would be simply one of form, which might be remedied by a new proceeding, and would not involve any question of permanent right. The entry upon the track of the road for the purpose of opening it would be simply a trespass, commenced under color of a right acquired by the proceedings of the commissioners of highways. The ordinary remedy for the redress of such a grievance is a common action at law; and, without some extraordinary feature, a court of equity would have no jurisdiction of the case. The remedy by injunction is one of the instrumentalities by which courts of equity administered justice in cases within its jurisdiction; and now, since legal and equitable proceedings are blended, a party, to entitle himself to that remedy, must establish what under the former practice would have been an equitable cause of action. In certain cases an injunction might be obtained to prevent a trespass; but the case must be brought within some acknowledged head of equity jurisdiction. A suit in chancery would often lie to quiet the plaintiff's title to land, but this was only where the law did not afford adequate protection, as where the adverse proceeding was under a statute which made the record presumptive evidence, or the like. (Scott v. Onderdonk, 14 N.Y. 9.)So where a resort to equity was necessary to prevent a multiplicity of suits, or to settle a question of property claimed under a statute; but it is settled that, in such a case, the plaintiff must first have prevailed upon the trial of some of the suits. (West v. The Mayor, & c., of New York, 10 Paige, 539; Eldridge v. Hill, 2 John. Ch., 281.) If, then, the present were a case in which the commissioners of highways of Hoosick had a right to lay out and open a highway across the plaintiff's premises, provided they followed accurately the directions of the statute, a suit for an injunction and for a judgment declaring the order void would not lie upon the allegation that their proceedings were irregular, or even that, by a defect of form, they had failed to acquire jurisdiction in the particular case. There is no reason to doubt...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP
97 practice notes
  • 61 S.W. 684 (Mo. 1901), Kansas & Texas Coal Railway v. Northwestern Coal & Mining Company
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 26, 1901
    ...90 N.Y. 21; Railroad v. Chicago, 141 Ill. 586, 30 N.E. 1044; Railroad v. Chicago, 151 Ill. 359, 37 N.E. 880; Railroad v. Brownell, 24 N.Y. 345; Railroad v. Greenbush, 52 N.Y. 510; Railroad v. Railroad, 118 Mo. 599, 24 S.W. 478; R. S. 1889, sec. 2543; R. S. 1899, sec. 1035. Private property ......
  • 113 N.W. 598 (N.D. 1907), City of Grafton v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • August 9, 1907
    ...71 N.W. 541, 102 Iowa 624; Railway Co. v. Sharpe, 38 Ohio St. 150; People v. B. & A. Ry. Co., 70 N.Y. 569; Railroad Co. v. Brownell, 24 N.Y. 345; Boston, etc., Ry. Co. v. Greenbush, 52 N.Y. 510; Canal Co. v. Village of Whitehall, 90 N.Y. 21; Portland, etc., Ry. Co. v. Deering, 2 A. 670,......
  • 203 N.Y. 167, People ex rel. New York Cent. and Hudson River Railroad Co. v. Woodbury
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • October 17, 1911
    ...and that this was not taking private property for public use in violation of the Constitution. ( Albany Northern R. R. Co. v. Brownell, 24 N.Y. 345.)The argument of the court was that 'railroad companies under the general act do not acquire the same unqualified title and right of dispositio......
  • 213 F. 87 (E.D.Okl. 1914), 2031, St. Louis & S.F.R. Co. v. City of Tulsa
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 10th Circuit Eastern District of Oklahoma
    • April 8, 1914
    ...Co. v. Williamson, 91 N.Y. 552; In re City of Buffalo, 68 N.Y. 167; In re Boston & A.R. Co., 53 N.Y. 577; Railroad Co. v. Bronnell, 24 N.Y. 345; Milwaukee & St. P. Ry. Co. v. City of Faribault, 23 Minn. 167; Railroad Co. v. Muder, 49 Mo. 165; Mohawk & H.R. Co. v. Archer, 6 Paige......
  • Free signup to view additional results
97 cases
  • 61 S.W. 684 (Mo. 1901), Kansas & Texas Coal Railway v. Northwestern Coal & Mining Company
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 26, 1901
    ...90 N.Y. 21; Railroad v. Chicago, 141 Ill. 586, 30 N.E. 1044; Railroad v. Chicago, 151 Ill. 359, 37 N.E. 880; Railroad v. Brownell, 24 N.Y. 345; Railroad v. Greenbush, 52 N.Y. 510; Railroad v. Railroad, 118 Mo. 599, 24 S.W. 478; R. S. 1889, sec. 2543; R. S. 1899, sec. 1035. Private property ......
  • 113 N.W. 598 (N.D. 1907), City of Grafton v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • August 9, 1907
    ...71 N.W. 541, 102 Iowa 624; Railway Co. v. Sharpe, 38 Ohio St. 150; People v. B. & A. Ry. Co., 70 N.Y. 569; Railroad Co. v. Brownell, 24 N.Y. 345; Boston, etc., Ry. Co. v. Greenbush, 52 N.Y. 510; Canal Co. v. Village of Whitehall, 90 N.Y. 21; Portland, etc., Ry. Co. v. Deering, 2 A. 670,......
  • 203 N.Y. 167, People ex rel. New York Cent. and Hudson River Railroad Co. v. Woodbury
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • October 17, 1911
    ...and that this was not taking private property for public use in violation of the Constitution. ( Albany Northern R. R. Co. v. Brownell, 24 N.Y. 345.)The argument of the court was that 'railroad companies under the general act do not acquire the same unqualified title and right of dispositio......
  • 213 F. 87 (E.D.Okl. 1914), 2031, St. Louis & S.F.R. Co. v. City of Tulsa
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 10th Circuit Eastern District of Oklahoma
    • April 8, 1914
    ...Co. v. Williamson, 91 N.Y. 552; In re City of Buffalo, 68 N.Y. 167; In re Boston & A.R. Co., 53 N.Y. 577; Railroad Co. v. Bronnell, 24 N.Y. 345; Milwaukee & St. P. Ry. Co. v. City of Faribault, 23 Minn. 167; Railroad Co. v. Muder, 49 Mo. 165; Mohawk & H.R. Co. v. Archer, 6 Paige......
  • Free signup to view additional results