Case ID: ny_222/html/0542-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People of the State of New York ex rel. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant, v. State Board of Tax Commissioners, Respondent. Same, Appellant, v. Same, Respondent. City of Mount Vernon, Intervening, Respondent in both cases.
    
      People ex rel. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co. v. State Board Tax Comrs., 179 App. Div. 489, affirmed.
    (Argued November 14, 1917;
    decided December 4, 1917.)
    Appeal in each of the above-entitled proceedings, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered July 2, 1917, which affirmed an order entered upon the report of a referee dismissing a writ of certiorari to review special franchise assessments of relator’s railroad crossing of Mount Vernon avenue and Oak street in the city of Mount Vernon The relator’s railroad formerly crossed Mount Vernon avenue and Oak street, in the city of Mount Vernon, at grade. Mount Vernon avenue was laid out and opened subsequent to the purchase of the relator’s right of way, and was not subject to the special franchise assessment. In the year 1905 the relator and the city of Mount Vernon jointly petitioned the board of railroad commissioners for an order eliminating the above grade crossings, in connection with others, and for a relocation of the line of the relator’s railroad, as shown upon the plans mutually agreed upon, .and which contemplated an increase in the railroad facilities of the relator. Such proceedings were had that the work was directed to be done under the provisions of law applicable thereto, and such work was actually undertaken and was well along at the time the assessments here under consideration were made. This work involved the construction of bridges carrying the relator’s lines of railroad over these highways. These lines were not only re-located, but the number of tracks was increased from two to four, and the relator was enabled to materially increase its facilities by reason of this re-location of its tracks. The two assessments herein involved were made before the actual completion of the re-located Unes, and before the relator had abandoned the original lines; but at the time of making these assessments no assessment was made against the Oak street grade crossing.
    
      George H. Walker and Alexander S. Lyman for appellant.
    
      Frank A. Bennett, Corporation Counsel, for city of Mount Vernon, respondent.
   Order in each case affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Chase, Cuddeback, Cardozo, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.