Order affirmed, without costs.
Respondent is the owner of a private street, through which one Coleman claims an easement of ingress and egress. Respondent claims that appellant, who is the attorney for Coleman, trespassed on the private street and directed the destruction of a fence and sign erected by respondent barring access to the street. Under the circumstances here disclosed, it cannot be said that the Special Term exercised its discretion improvidently in granting...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.