Majority
Headnote
Gas and electricity— Transportation Corporations Law, sections 60 and 61, construed — right of gas company to lay mains to supply gas to adjoining municipalities.The plaintiff, as the successor to the Northern Westchester Light and Power Company, by a merger was, on the 23d day of April,-1912, engaged in laying its gas mains or conductors in the streets specified in the complaint, for the purpose of supplying its customers in the village of Ossining with gas, and extending its said gas mains beyond the limits of the village of Ossining to and through the village of Briarcliff Manor, and to and through the village of Pleasantville, when the defendant, by force, drove the plaintiff’s employees from their work and prevented the laying of the pipes. The plaintiff thereupon brought this action to restrain the defendant from interfering with the work; and a preliminary injunction issued, which, upon the trial of the action, was made permanent, and the defendant appeals from the judgment.
The defendant urges that it is unable to find any law giving the authorities of one municipality the right to grant to a gas company the power to tear up its streets, without consent of abutting owners, to lay pipes to supply gas to an outside municipality. It may be remarked, in passing, that the.
Here is clearly ample authority for the plaintiff in this action, organized, as it is, for the purpose of supplying gas for light, to make use of the streets of the village of Ossining, either to supply that municipality with gas or for the purpose of supplying any of the other villages or towns named in its certificate of incorporation, provided it has the consent of the municipal authorities. There is no dispute that on or about the 7th day of March, 1905, the defendant granted to the Northern Westchester Light and Power Company (the plaintiff being its successor) the right to lay its conductors for conducting gas through the streets of Ossining without limitation, but it is contended by the defendant that this consent did not operate to give the plaintiff the right to run its conductors through
In this view of the matter it is clearly immaterial that the court excluded evidence of admissions on the part of the plaintiff’s superintendent that the work being done was for the purpose of supplying the other towns and villages mentioned in its charter, and the evidence of such superintendent, called by the defendant, assuming that it established the fact, would have no bearing upon the proper disposition of this appeal.
The judgment appealed from should be- affirmed, with costs,
Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr and Rich, JJ., concurred.
Judgment affirmed, -with costs.
Cases cited
- People ex rel. Woodhaven Gas Light Co. v. Deehan 153 N. Y. 528 p. 792