Court Opinion

ID: 9866730
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 13:39:06.467056+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:41:26.047469
License: Public Domain

Finch and Desmond, JJ.,
dissent in the following memorandum: Giving to section 91 of the Railroad Law a broad construction to effect its beneficent purposes and to distribute fairly the cost of necessary safety measures, we consider that there was as to the Erie railroad bridge, such an “ alteration in the manner of * * * crossing ” by the relocation of the highway under and approaching that bridge as to justify the Commission in charging Erie with its fair share of the cost of the work done on both the strips of highway described in the opinion of Judge Lewis. The orders should be affirmed.
Lehman, Ch. J., Lottghran and Conway, JJ., concur with Lewis, J.; Finch and Desmond, JJ., dissent in separate memorandum; Rippey, J., taking no part.
Orders reversed, etc.