From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Buchanan v. Cardozo

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 24, 1965
16 N.Y.2d 1029 (N.Y. 1965)

Opinion

Argued October 26, 1965

Decided November 24, 1965

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, JOHN P. DONOHOE, J.

Howard A. Kochendorfer for appellant-respondent.

John F. Bianchi for respondents-appellants.


Upon defendant's appeal: Order affirmed, without costs. Upon plaintiffs' cross appeal: Appeal dismissed for lack of finality, without costs. We agree with Special Term that there was a continuing trespass. Special Term is directed to fix the time and conditions under which defendant is to construct his wall in a safe condition and to remove the debris from plaintiffs' property, and to assess damages and enter an appropriate judgment in accordance herewith.

Concur: Chief Judge DESMOND and Judges DYE, FULD, VAN VOORHIS, BURKE, SCILEPPI and BERGAN.


Summaries of

Buchanan v. Cardozo

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 24, 1965
16 N.Y.2d 1029 (N.Y. 1965)
Case details for

Buchanan v. Cardozo

Case Details

Full title:DAVID H. BUCHANAN et al., Respondents-Appellants, v. PETER S. CARDOZO…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 24, 1965

Citations

16 N.Y.2d 1029 (N.Y. 1965)
265 N.Y.S.2d 908
213 N.E.2d 317

Citing Cases

Kanayama v. Kesy, LLC

Further, Kesy and its principal were repeatedly notified of the continuing leaks from the sixth floor…

Galchus v. Vichinsky

ight to use and enjoy land; (5) caused by the defendant's conduct (see Copart Indus. v Consolidated Edison…