Case Name: In the Matter of the Application and Petition of The City of New York to Acquire Certain Real Estate at Mohansic Lake and Little Mohansic Lake, in the Town of Yorktown, Westchester County, New York, under the Greater New York Charter and Pursuant to Chapter 543 of the Laws of 1925, to Be Acquired for the Sanitary Protection of the Water Supply of the City of New York. The City of New York, Appellant; Sarah Percy and Emillie Maillot, Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1930-04
Citations: 229 A.D. 722
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Application and Petition of The City of New York to Acquire Certain Real Estate at Mohansic Lake and Little Mohansic Lake, in the Town of Yorktown, Westchester County, New York, under the Greater New York Charter and Pursuant to Chapter 543 of the Laws of 1925, to Be Acquired for the Sanitary Protection of the Water Supply of the City of New York. The City of New York, Appellant; Sarah Percy and Emillie Maillot, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 229
Pages: 722–722

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Application and Petition of The City of New York to Acquire Certain Real Estate at Mohansic Lake and Little Mohansic Lake, in the Town of Yorktown, Westchester County, New York, under the Greater New York Charter and Pursuant to Chapter 543 of the Laws of 1925, to Be Acquired for the Sanitary Protection of the Water Supply of the City of New York. The City of New York, Appellant; Sarah Percy and Emillie Maillot, Respondents.

Opinion:
The decision of this court handed down on March 28,1930, is hereby amended to read as follows: Order amending order, in so far as appealed from, modified by striking out the words " the date of entry of this order " and inserting in place thereof the words " December 11th, 1929," and as so modified affirmed, without costs. The county clerk exceeded his authority in docketing the order of December 11, 1929, as a judgment. His signature thereon did not change the character of the document. It was always an order; never a judgment. Claimants could not have been misled by the addition of the clerk's signature, which did not remove the proceeding from the effect of the Greater New York Charter, under which the limitation upon appeals is twenty days, Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Kapper, Hagarty and Scudder, JJ., concur.