¶1I vote for an affirmance of the order, upon the ground that, independently of the charter of Greater New York, the complaint and proceedings in this action were sufficient to justify the court below in granting the order appealed from. But, as the questions certified, if decided in favor of the appellant, would not authorize a reversal of the order, I think they are in effect mere abstract questions which this court should decline to answer. (Grannan v. Westchester Racing Assn.,153 N.Y. 449;Baxter v. McDonnell,154 N.Y. 432; Hearst v. Shea,156 N.Y. 169; Schenck v. Barnes,156 N.Y. 316; Coatsworth v.Lehigh Valley R. Co.,156 N.Y. 451.) *447
10 E.H. Smith 437
51 N.E 303
Blaschko v. . Wurster
Decided October 4, 1898
New York Court of Appeals · decided 1898-10-04
Appeal, by certification, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered December 28, 1897, affirming an order of Special Term continuing an injunction. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion.
Relies on Baxter v. . McDonnell · 10 E.H. Smith 316 - Schenck v. . Barnes · 10 E.H. Smith 451 - Coatsworth v. Lehigh Valley Railway Co.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1898-10-04
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 1996
12 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →