Case Name: In the Matter of the Application of the City of New York, Respondent, Relative to Acquiring Title to Lands Required for the Opening and Extending of East Twelfth Street, from Ditmas Avenue to Foster Avenue, in the Borough of Brooklyn. Katherine E. Farmer, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1917-03-20
Citations: 220 N.Y. 665
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Application of the City of New York, Respondent, Relative to Acquiring Title to Lands Required for the Opening and Extending of East Twelfth Street, from Ditmas Avenue to Foster Avenue, in the Borough of Brooklyn. Katherine E. Farmer, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 220
Pages: 665–666

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Application of the City of New York, Respondent, Relative to Acquiring Title to Lands Required for the Opening and Extending of East Twelfth Street, from Ditmas Avenue to Foster Avenue, in the Borough of Brooklyn. Katherine E. Farmer, Appellant.
Matter of City of New York (East 12th Street), 173 App. Div. 949, affirmed.
(Argued February 28, 1917;
decided March 20, 1917.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered April 15, 1916, which affirmed an order of Special Term confirming the report of commissioners of estimate and assessment in street opening proceedings. The appeal is taken on behalf of the alleged owner of benefit parcel No. 18 on the ground that discrimination has been made in the assessment proposed to be levied against said property to her detriment and damage, as other property in the area of assessment has been wholly exempted from any assessment for benefit due to the fact that the owners of said parcels have ceded their land lying in the bed of the street to the city, and on the grounds that the amount of the assessment exceeds the value of the benefit and advantage derived by said premises by reason of this proceeding and that the assessments are inequitable and unjust and not levied according to law.
Herbert G. Andrews for appellant.
Lamar Hardy, Corporation Counsel (Andrew C. Troy and Edwin J. Talley of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Chase, Cuddeback, Hogan, Pound, McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ.