Case ID: ny-st-rep_31/html/0911-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Louisa M. Rauenstein, Resp’t, v. The New York, Lackawanna & Western R. R. Co., App’lt.1
    
      (Court of Appeals, Second Division,
    
    
      Filed June 24, 1890.)
    
    Railroad—Liability for raising grade of cross street by embankment in center.
    An owner of property abutting on a street of which the city has the fee, cannot recover damages of a railroad for raising the grade of the center of the street, compelling him to drive back some distance in order to cross the track by means of such changed grade.
    (Following Ottenot v. N. Y., Lack. <6 W. R. R., 28 N. T. State Rep., 483.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the superior court of the city of Buffalo, affirming a judgment entered on a Amrdict in favor of the plaintiff.
    
      John G. Milburn, for app’lt; no appearance for resp’t.
   Per Curiam.

The plaintiff in this action owned certain lots on the east side of Commercial street, in the city of Buffalo, opposite those owned by the plaintiff in Ottenot v. The New York, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company, 28 N. Y. State Rep., 483, recently decided by this court. There is no difference in the principle and substantially none in the facts of the two cases. The same questions arose in each, presented by the same exceptions and by the same evidence, except as to the location, value and ownership of the property belonging to the respective plaintiffs. The determination of the court in the Ottenot case must govern the decision of this, appeal and the judgment should, therefore, be reversed and a new granted, with costs to abide the event.

All concur.