Wurster v. City of New York — 199 N.Y. 534

Majority

p. 534

Frederick W. Wurster et al., Appellants, v. The City of New York et al., Respondents.

Headnote

Wurster v. City of New York, 136 App. Div. 408 , affirmed.

(Argued June 1, 1910;

decided June 17, 1910.)

Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered January 26, 1910, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion to continue jjendente lite an injunc

p. 535

tion restraining the discontinuance of certain ferries across the East river.

The following questions were certified :

“First. Can the plaintiffs maintain this action?

“Second. May the Supreme Court in itp discretion grant the injunction asked for pendente lite f ”

Nathaniel A. Elsberg, Chase Mellen and Francis Wood-bridge for appellants.

Archibald N. Watson, Corporation Comisel (Theodore Connoly and Terence Farley of counsel), for respondents.

Order affirmed, with costs; first question answered in the negative; second question not answered ; no opinion.

Concur: Gray, Haight, Vann, Werner, Hiscock and Chase, JJ. Absent: Cullen, Ch. J.