Tibta v. 156 E 21 LLC, 2025 NY Slip Op 25064 (2025)

Citation: Tibta v. 156 E 21 LLC, 2025 NY Slip Op 25064 (2025)
Parent Document: Tibta v. 156 E 21 LLC, 2025 NY Slip Op 25064 (2025)
Jurisdiction: New York (state)
Effective Date: 2025-03-18
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10360414/tibta-v-156-e-21-llc/ ↗

Full Text

1,475 chars

In De Camp v Bullard  upon which the Utsey Housing Court judge relied  the Supreme Court, Herkimer County, awarded a judgment to plaintiff-land owner, enjoining defendants-loggers from using that part of a river and its tributaries which was on plaintiff's property to float logs downstream. The Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed the order in its entirety, without any analysis, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division. (De Camp v Bullard, 159 NY at 456.) Prior to the entry of the restraining order and judgment by the Supreme Court, defendants were already in the process of floating two million (2,000,000) feet of timber stretching over 16 miles downriver towards the water on plaintiff's property. Two days after the Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court, defendants applied to the Appellate Division seeking remitter and amendment of the order to permit them to continue floating the logs downriver and through plaintiff's estuary. The court temporarily "suspended" the judgment and set an undertaking to indemnify plaintiff for his loss of exclusive possession of his land. Rejecting the defendants' argument that there should be no toll for crossing plaintiff's land because plaintiff could show no loss from allowing the logs to float through their property, the court based the undertaking on the value to the "trespassers" of the use of plaintiff's property. Noting that willfulness is a factor, the Court of Appeals opined:

Other Sections in This Document (50)

Full Text