A court found Moses had seized private property illegally and beyond his powers

Evidence

In the former court, Moses could not evade the facts that the Times had relegated to paragraph twenty-six. When, as he had promised the Times’s readers, he did “fight” the injunction issued by the “local judge,” asking the State Supreme Court to invalidate it, Supreme Court Justice James C. Van Siclen refused. “The defendants have proceeded and are proceeding and threatening to proceed in a manner which tends irregularly, illegally and beyond their powers, under and in violation of the laws and Constitution of the State of New York and of the United States, to invade and seize the property of the plaintiff,” Van Siclen said. — Robert A. Caro, The Power Broker, 828

Categorization

• XREF: Counterpoint to the recurring narrative in earlier chapters that Moses prevailed in every legal fight; shows an early major judicial setback on the eve of the depression-era build-out. — connects to: Moses reneged on an agreed deferral and seized even unappropriated property — Robert A. Caro, The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the…, 819; Moses’s evasive answers revealed he knew the appropriation was unlawful — Robert A. Caro, The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the…, 835; The court ruled Moses’s Taylor seizure was fundamentally unlawful — Robert A. Caro, The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the…, 896 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• The court ruled Moses’s Taylor seizure was fundamentally unlawful #corroborates (0.95) — Robert A. Caro, The Power Broker, 896
• Moses’s evasive answers revealed he knew the appropriation was unlawful #corroborates (0.80) — Robert A. Caro, The Power Broker, 835
• Moses could seize private land but needed voter approval for township-owned land #qualifies (0.80) — Robert A. Caro, The Power Broker, 897