Case Name: Frank V. R. Stillman, Respondent, v. City of Olean, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1918-07-02
Citations: 184 A.D. 323
Docket Number: 
Parties: Frank V. R. Stillman, Respondent, v. City of Olean, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 184
Pages: 323–327

Head Matter:
Frank V. R. Stillman, Respondent, v. City of Olean, Appellant.
Fourth Department,
July 2, 1918.
Real property — municipal corporations — suit to restrain city from opening public street through plaintiff’s lands — nominal damages where plaintiff has only naked fee subject to private easements — injunctions — when rights of condemnation may be adjudicated in suit in equity — costs.
Where lands are burdened with a private right of way in the nature of an easement, coextensive with the bounds of a proposed city street, so that the owner has only a naked fee, he is entitled only to nominal damages when the lands are subjected to the additional use as a public street.
A court-of equity is not required to issue an injunction to protect a mere technical right.
Although a city in attempting to open a public street acted upon the petition of persons having private rights of way over the same, it had no right to subject the lands to the further burden of a public street without making compensation to the owner.
Where the owner of a naked fee in such lands sues in equity to enjoin the the city from entering upon said premises to open them as a public highway the respective rights of the parties may be adjudicated in said suit and provisions may be made for acquiring the lands without resorting to condemnation proceedings.
Certain findings disapproved and reversed.
Held, that the plaintiff is entitled to costs, unless the defendant pay nominal damages with the costs of the action, including the costs of an appeal. Foote and Htjbbs, JJ., dissented, with memorandum.
Appeal by the defendant, the City of Olean, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Cattaraugus on the 6th day of December, 1916, upon the decision of the court after a trial at the Cattaraugus Special Term.
The judgment perpetually enjoined the defendant from entering upon plaintiff’s premises therein described for the purpose of throwing the same open for use as a public highway and from trespassing thereon and from interfering with plaintiff’s use and enjoyment of said premises, except in pursuance of lawful proceedings to acquire plaintiff’s property ‘for public use and to determine the compensation to be made therefor.
George A. Larkin and Allen J. Hastings, for the appellant.
Creighton S. Andrews, for the respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
The judgment should be modified. We hold:
1. The locus in quo is not a public highway. (210 N. Y. 168.) But plaintiff's premises are burdened with a private right of way in the nature of an easement, coextensive with the bounds of Thirteenth street as delineated on the Gosseline map; that the plaintiff has only the naked fee and is entitled to only nominal damages for subjecting such lands to the additional use of a public street. (Matter of Village of Olean v. Steyner, 135 N. Y. 345; Wyman v. Mayor, 11 Wend. 486; Kerrigan v. Backus, 69 App. Div. 329.) And a court of equity is not required to issue an injunction to protect a mere technical right. (McCann v. Chasm Power Co., 211 N. Y. 301.)
2. Although the city, in attempting to open Thirteenth street, acted upon the petition of persons having a private right of way over the same, it did not have the right to subject said lands to the further burden of a public street without making compensation therefor to the owner.
3. Ordinarily the city would be required to resort to condemnation proceedings to acquire the land for street purposes, but this being an action in equity, in which the rights of the respective parties may be adjudicated, provision may be made for acquiring the same without resorting to that proceeding. (Pappenheim v. Metropolitan Elevated R. Co., 128 N. Y. 436.)
4. The finding that the plaintiff's premises are not and have never been burdened with or subject to a private easement or private right of way; that none of the deeds in plaintiff's chain of title recognize any public or private easement upon or over the plaintiff's premises, and all other findings of similar import, are disapproved and reversed, and express findings should be made -to the contrary by this court.
5. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs, unless the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the nominal damages and the costs of this action, including the costs of this appeal, upon receiving a conveyance from the plaintiff of his right, title and interest in the lands described in the complaint for street purposes only, so far as they are included within the bounds of Thirteenth street, and permit the plaintiff a reasonable time to remove the building from said lands. The time within which such damages and costs are to be paid and the house removed to be fixed in the judgment, which may be settled on two days' notice.
All concurred, except Foote and Htjbbs, JJ., who dissented, and voted for affirmance in a memorandum by Foote, J.