Case Name: Sixth Ave. R. Co., Respondent, v. Metropolitan El. Ry. Co. et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1892-05-13
Citations: 18 N.Y.S. 939
Docket Number: 
Parties: Sixth Ave. R. Co., Respondent, v. Metropolitan El. Ry. Co. et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 18
Pages: 939–940

Head Matter:
Sixth Ave. R. Co., Respondent, v. Metropolitan El. Ry. Co. et al., Appellants.
(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department
May 13, 1892.)
Appeal from special term. New York county.
Action by the Sixth Avenue Railroad Company against the Metropolitan Elevated Railway Company and the Manhattan Railway Company to restrain the maintenance and operation of defendants’ railroad on Sixth avenue, New York city, in front of plaintiff’s property, and for damages.
For former reports, see 9 N. Y. Supp. 207; 11 N. Y. Supp. 941, mem.; 14 N. Y. Supp. 97.
Argued before Van Brunt, P. J„ and O’Brien and Ingraham, JJ.
Davies & liapallo, (i?. C. James, of counsel,) for appellants. Burrill, Zabriskie & Burrill, (J. E. Burrill and G. Zdbriskie, of counsel,) for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Upon examining the brief of the counsel for the appellants in this case we do not find any questions of law raised which have not been previously considered and disposed of by this court, and therefore it is not necessary to reconsider them upon this appeal. Upon the questions of fact involved, it does not appear that the learned judge below has committed any errors which would justify this court in reversing the judgment. The judgment should therefore be affirmed, witli costs.