Case Name: In the Matter of the Application of The City of New York Relative to Acquiring Title, etc., for the Opening and Extending of One Hundred and Twenty-fifth (Sixteenth) Street from Twenty-third (Seventh) Avenue to Twenty-fifth (Eighth) Avenue and One Hundred and Twenty-sixth (Seventeenth) Street from Twenty-third (Seventh) Avenue to Twenty-fifth (Eighth) Avenue, in the Borough of Queens, City of New York. Susannah Kraemer, Appellant; The City of New York, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1935-04
Citations: 244 A.D. 725
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Application of The City of New York Relative to Acquiring Title, etc., for the Opening and Extending of One Hundred and Twenty-fifth (Sixteenth) Street from Twenty-third (Seventh) Avenue to Twenty-fifth (Eighth) Avenue and One Hundred and Twenty-sixth (Seventeenth) Street from Twenty-third (Seventh) Avenue to Twenty-fifth (Eighth) Avenue, in the Borough of Queens, City of New York. Susannah Kraemer, Appellant; The City of New York, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 244
Pages: 725–725

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Application of The City of New York Relative to Acquiring Title, etc., for the Opening and Extending of One Hundred and Twenty-fifth (Sixteenth) Street from Twenty-third (Seventh) Avenue to Twenty-fifth (Eighth) Avenue and One Hundred and Twenty-sixth (Seventeenth) Street from Twenty-third (Seventh) Avenue to Twenty-fifth (Eighth) Avenue, in the Borough of Queens, City of New York. Susannah Kraemer, Appellant; The City of New York, Respondent.

Opinion:
Proceeding in condemnation for the opening of certain streets, including One Hundred and Twenty-sixth street, borough of Queens, from Twenty-third avenue to Twenty-fifth avenue. An award was made for nominal damages. Appellant claims the right to substantial damages on the theory of adverse possession. The claim is not a valid one. (Matter of Village of Olean v. Steyner, 135 N. Y. 341; Smyles v. Hastings, 22 id. 217.) Final decree, in so far as appealed from, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present —• Lazansky, P. J., Young, Carswell, Seudder and Johnston, JJ.