Case Name: The People of the State of New York ex rel. City of Glens Falls, Respondent, v. The County of Warren et al., Appellants
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1916-06-06
Citations: 218 N.Y. 708
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York ex rel. City of Glens Falls, Respondent, v. The County of Warren et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 218
Pages: 708–709

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York ex rel. City of Glens Falls, Respondent, v. The County of Warren et al., Appellants.
People ex rel. City of Glens Falls v. County of Warren, 170 App. Div. 144, affirmed.
(Argued May 23, 1916;
decided June 6, 1916.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered November 29, 1915, which sustained a writ of certiorari and reversed a determination of the board of supervisors of the county of Warren disallowing and rejecting a claim of the relator for an amount, being the county’s share of the expense of building a bridge across the Hudson river extending from the city of Glens Falls, in Warren county, to the village of. South Glens Falls, Saratoga county: The dividing linó' between the counties and between the' city and the town is the center of the north channel of the Hudson river, which is formed by an island, and being the channel nearer the Warren county side) The question presented upon this appeal is whether the county of Warren is liable for a proportionate share of the entire new bridge, or whether it is liable only for the portion of the bridge which spans the north channel, leaving the town of Moreau to pay exclusively, as it heretofore has, for the maintenance of the portion which spans the south channel, and for the highway across the island. Also whether Warren county is liable for any portion of the damages for the change in grade in the city of G-lens Falls, and whether it can pass on the reasonableness of the length of the approaches.
Loyal L. Davis for appellants.
J. Edward Singleton for respondent.

Opinion:
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Willard Bartlett, Oh. J., Hiscock, Chase, Cuddebaok, Hogar, Oardozo and Pound, JJ.