Case ID: nys_42/html/1131-11.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BARRETT, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PHILIPS et al., Respondents, v. NEW YORK EL. R. CO. et al., Appellants.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    December 11, 1896.)
    Action by William H. Philips against the New York Elevated Railroad Company and another. Julien T. Davies, George T. Aldrich, and C. K. Morrison, for appellants. Benjamin A. Gould, Jr., and James B. Ludlow, for respondents.
   BARRETT, J.

The judgment in this case should be affirmed for the reasons assigned in the opinion handed down in the action brought by the same plaintiffs against the Metropolitan Elevated Railroad Company and another (42 N. Y. Supp. 33) with regard to No. 59 Murray street. We think the sum allowed for fee value in the present case, and also the award for rental damages, were fair and reasonable. The questions of law are substantially the same as in the Murray Street Case, and have been sufficiently considered in the opinion above referred to. No. other questions calling for special consideration are here presented. The judgment should therefore be affirmed, with costs.