The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1858-02-06
Supreme Court-General Term.
Before Hon Judges Davies, Clerke and Sutherland

Before Hon. Judges Davies, Clerke and Sutherland
SUIT INVOLVING LARGE QUANTITY OF "
ESTATE OF THE CITY.
FEB b.--John Warwick u.s. the Mayor, Aldermen,
and the Commissioners of the Sinking Fknd--Ths sr
wolves large amount Of real estate The PLAINTIFFS
forth that by virtue OF the Of the Legislature ped
18th April, 1887 establishing the Thirteenth avenuAA
extending the exterior limit OF the city along the
shore of the Hudson river, between Hammer nd andsth
streets, the plaintiff acquired pre-. emptive rgtp
grant of lot of land under water to be made by thor
poration Of tho city, lying between West street The
Thirteenth avenue and $50 feet in width southwarreu
the centre of Bank street. that this preemplive ri
conferred the plaintiff by the Legislature forner
torious and valuable consideration viz To couasato
him for the injury he sustained by extending outvd the
limit of the city opposite his property and ereSy
depriving him Of the benefits Of exterior owrship
The pre- emptve right in question Is an nchoate ht and
interest in, and to specific, separate and mdenden
piece, lot of land having value land great e. too1
in Of and by ITSELF and capable OF separate ID nds-
pendent enjoyment
The plaintiff has not parted with his preempe right,
and still owns it, If is separate and ndepepnt right
and interest," he could only convey "by det o. ocn
yeyance in writing" subscribed by him, anpntainiAg
appropriate words Of description. 1t is auresant
10 his land on the east side Of West street. havg been
quired after his mortgages were gven form no pass
OF the mortgaged premises and old not pass the fere
title to the fee sf land mortgage is mereecurity for
money. The title to the landIremans in henortgagor
In this case the appurtenant attached to the tile wh'cn
was held by the plaintiff.
The grant Of the water OF in question, rde by the
Commissioners Of the Sinking Fund to Robert DuIfee
December, 1852, is void for several rea1sns.
Some of the points raised by Mr. Lawrece Assistant
Corporation Counsel that in 1888 and 1885 pantu exc
cuted various mortgages on the first por OF the pro-
perty which were eventually assigned TO " Mayor, &C..
Of New Yark, under the act Of Jan. 1886; that IN
February, 1870, and August 1872 the Maer &c, fore
closed their mortgages, purchased the praises and o.
tanned masters deed of the same; in III the plaintiff
commissioners
grant Of the sec md piece Of property wh was refused
The plaintiff has nov improperly unitet two causes d
action in his complaint The Code is xpress that the
causes of action united in complaint INST all belong v
Of the classes therein specified and INST affect all the
parties to the action and must be separay stated The
causes stated 10 the complaint do not being to one class
The one is an individual claim, the ottr a claim In
representative character behalf of he tax payers
large; such causes of action cannot united Now
although the plaintiff is nominay the osy plaintiff in this
action the second claim be is the representative Of al
the taxpayers Of the city and they all ntens sne
purposes plaintiffs in the case and te individual CLAIM
which the complaint sets forth does ut exist In favsr q
those taxpayers. Decision reserved.