Case Name: Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal, Respondent, v. The Central Railroad Company of New Jersey, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1919-02-25
Citations: 225 N.Y. 712
Docket Number: 
Parties: Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal, Respondent, v. The Central Railroad Company of New Jersey, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 225
Pages: 712–712

Head Matter:
Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal, Respondent, v. The Central Railroad Company of New Jersey, Appellant.
Brooklyn E. D. Terminal v. Central R. R. Co. of New Jersey, 176 App. Div. 352, affirmed.
(Argued January 27, 1919;
decided February 25, 1919.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered January 29, 1917, in favor of plaintiff upon the submission of a controversy under section 1279 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The plaintiff operates a union freight terminal station in Brooklyn, N. Y. The defendant is one of the trunk line railroads that avails itself of the terminal’s facilities under a contract in writing, which sets forth all the rights and obligations of the parties. The controversy arose because a carload of hay shipped over the railroad’s lines and consigned to one F. Williams at the terminal, was refused and not removed by the consignee. The hay was unloaded into the plaintiff’s warehouses and, in compliance with the New York statute governing the disposal of refused and unclaimed freight, was stored for one year and thereafter sold at public auction (L. 1909, ch. 25, § 282). The plaintiff contended that the services rendered by it were rendered to the railroad and were outside the contract. The railroad insisted that such services as were rendered to it by the plaintiff were expressly covered by the contract and that if further or additional compensation is or was due the plaintiff it is due from the consignee or owner of the hay and not from the railroad.
Neil P. Cullom, Arthur W. Rinke and Jackson E. Reynolds for appellant.
H. B. Closson for respondent.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion
Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Collin, Cuddeback, Cardozo, Pound, Crane and Andrews, JJ.