Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Rome, Watertown & Ogdensburg Railroad v. Smith 101 N.Y. 684

← Cases

Rome, Watertown & Ogdensburg Railroad v. Smith

101 N.Y. 684 Court N.Y. Decision date 1886-03-16 English

Judges All concur.

Contents

Majority

p. 684
Rome, Watertown and Ogdensburg Railroad Company, Appellant, v. James E. Smith, Respondent. Same, Appellant, v. Carroll Phippany, Respondent.
(Submitted March 2, 1886;
decided March 16, 1886.)
p. 685

Headnote

These were appeals from orders of General Term affirming orders of Special Term denying motions to continue temporary injunctions.
The actions were brought to restrain defendants, who were town collectors, from collecting certain taxes assessed upon the property of plaintiff, which it claimed to be invalid because of defects in the affidavits attached to the assessment-rolls.
Wm. B. Mornblower for appellant.
Edmund L. Pitts and John Qu/neen for respondents.

Agree to affirm without passing upon the validity of the original affidavits attached to the assessment-rolls.

All concur.

Orders affirmed.