Case Name: In re LOW et al. In re JORALEMON ST. (Mynderse, Notman and Abbott Parcels)
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1912-06-21
Citations: 136 N.Y.S. 360
Docket Number: 
Parties: In re LOW et al. In re JORALEMON ST. (Mynderse, Notman and Abbott Parcels).
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 136
Pages: 360–363

Head Matter:
In re LOW et al. In re JORALEMON ST. (Mynderse, Notman and Abbott Parcels).
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
June 21, 1912.)
Appeal and Error (§ 1097*)—Subsequent Appeals—Former Decisions as Law oe the Case. - •
A determination of the Appellate Division, in a matter not passed upon by the Court of Appeals on appeal thereto is, so far as the Special Term and the Appellate Division is concerned, the law of the case on a subsequent appeal. ’ -
[Ed. Note.—For othér cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 4358-4368, 4427; Dec, Dig. § 1097.*]
Burr, J., dissenting. ,
•For other cases see same topic & § number in Dee. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
Appeal from Special Term, Kings County.
In the matter of the application and petition of Seth Low and oth.ers, etc., in the matter of Joralemon Street, Mynderse, Notman and Abbott Parcels. From certain parts of the order of the Special Term entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings, William R. Willcox and others, constituting the Public Service Commission, etc., appeal.
Order, in so far as appealed from, affirmed.
Argued before JENICS, P. J., and HIRSCHBERG, BURR, WOODWARD, and RICH, JJ. • _ ' ' '
Clarence L. Barber, of New-York City, (Terence Farley, of New York City, on the brief), .for áppellants.
George W. Hinckley, Charles W. West, and Frederick B. Campbell, all of New York City, for respondents.

Opinion:
RICH, J.
The Public Service Commission, successors of the Rapid -Transit-Railroad "Commissioners, appeal from an order of the Special Term granting" costs and allowances to the respondents, to whom dámages have been -awarded for, property rights taken for the construction and operation of' a subway under Joralemon street, in the city of New York. '
"There are no disputed facts presented by the record, and the only question to be considered is whether or not the court possessed au-thority and power to-make the order appealed from. This question came before this court in this same proceeding in 1908, on an appeal from an order of the Special Term denying costs and allowances on 'the ground of lack of power in the court. It was contended by the •appellants that such power was given both by the provisions of the •charter of the city and by the Rapid Transit Act. This court sustained' this contention, holding that "the case now presented was within the provisions of the charter (Laws of' 1901, c. 466, § 998, as amended .by -chaptér 736, Laws .of 1904), authorizing the payment" of allowances, counsel fees, etc., in proceedings for "the acquisition of property for any public purpose in the city of New York," and that costs and allowances were also authorized by the provisions of the Rapid Transit Act (Laws 1891, c. 4, and acts amendatory thereof; Matter of Board of Rapid Transit Commissioners, 128 App. Div. 103, 112 N. Y. Supp. 619). This case was taken to the Court of Appeals, but the question of whether such costs, disbursements, and allowances were not-authorized by the provisions of the charter was not passed upon by that court. Matter of Rapid Transit R. R. Com'rs, 197 N. Y. 81, 110, 111, 90 N.E. 456, 36 L. R. A. (N. S.) 647, 18 Ann. Cas. 366.. Our determination that, under the provisions of the charter, authority. exists for the granting of costs and allowances, standing unreversed, is, so far as -the -Special Term and this court is concerned, the law of the case, and controls the disposition of this appeal in favor of the respondents.
The order appealed from is "affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
JENKS, P. J" and HIRSCHBERG and WOODWARD, JJ., concur.