In Clements v. The State (105 N.Y. 621), in which the award was affirmed in this court, it held the state liable for not properly puddling the banks of the canal after raising the level of the water in the canal.
Summary of this case from Reed v. the StateArgued March 4, 1887
Decided March 22, 1887
Denis O'Brien, Attorney-General, for appellant.
D.S. Potter for respondent.
Agree to affirm; no opinion
All concur
Award affirmed.
In Clements v. The State (105 N.Y. 621), in which the award was affirmed in this court, it held the state liable for not properly puddling the banks of the canal after raising the level of the water in the canal.
Summary of this case from Reed v. the StateFull title:WILLIAM S. CLEMENTS, Respondent, v . THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Appellant
Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Date published: Mar 22, 1887
In a case quite analogous to this, which came to this court from the Board of Claims, its conclusion of fact…