Case law

Avery & Lathrop v. Slack

19 Wend. 50 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1837

Hornsey v. Dimocke, 1 Vent. 119. Comyn’s Dig. pl. 2, D. 1. The distinction is fully illustrated by the case of an executor. He alw'avs sues in his own name. … The Overseers of the Poor of the town of Milan v.

Columbus Park Corp. v. Department of Housing Preservation & Development

149 Misc. 2d 66 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 16, 1990

"A modification of the terms of the Plan and Project and the Urban Renewal Plan would require approval by the Board of Estimate or the City Council after the dissolution of the Board and could be subject to the Uniform Land … Assocs. v Abrams ( 127 Misc 2d 372 , affd 104 AD2d 741 , affd 65 NY2d 716 ) does not support petitioner’s contention that respondents have acted improperly. In Park W. Vil. Assocs.

McKnight v. Hammock

101 Misc. 2d 1066 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 4, 1979

Actions of the board pursuant to section 259-i of the Executive Law are deemed to be judicial functions and are not reviewable in the courts if done in accordance with law (Matter of Watkins v Caldwell, 54 AD2d 42 ; Matter … of Briguglio v New York State Bd. of Parole, 24 NY2d 21 ; Matter of Ittig v New York State Bd. of Parole, 59 AD2d 972 ).

Niagara County Community College Faculty Ass'n v. Helsby

89 Misc. 2d 653 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 19, 1976

In accordance with Matter of New York State Public Employment Relations Bd. v Martin ( 78 Misc 2d 1072 ) the court finds that the service upon the attorneys for petitioner is also service upon the party. … (Matter of New York State *655 Public Employment Relations Bd. v Board of Educ., 39 NY2d 86 .)

Woods v. Armstrong

29 Misc. 660 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1899

Smith v. Knapp, 30 N. Y. 588 ; Lambert v. Snow, 9 Abb. Pr. 91 ; Brown v. Ashbough, 40 How. Pr. 226 . … The principle is well stated in Pam v. Vilmar, 52 How. Pr. 240 : “ The findings of the justice at special term cannot be considered for the purpose of upholding the execution against the defendant’s person.

People ex rel. Martin v. Gilon

14 N.Y.S. 75 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1891

It must be assumed that the board will do its duty and correct any errors in the assessment list, and, until they have passed upon the alleged errors of the assessors, there is no final decision which we can review. … This point has been so recently decided by this court in the case of People v. Gilon, 13 N. Y. Supp. 455 , that it is unnecessary to pursue it further. See opinion of the pourt by Brady, J.

In re Rector of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre

61 How. Pr. 315 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1880

Proof was offered on the part of the corporation, consisting of an extract from the records on file in the department of taxes, and an extract from the minutes of the board of health. … V. There is no proof that the drain was constructed under the act of 1871.

Reilly v. Mayor of New York

10 N.Y.S. 847 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 6, 1890

We are unable to see any distinction between the case at bar and the case of Dolan v. Mayor, 6 Hun, 506 . … The attempt to show that the resolution of the board of supervisors, adopted 20th December, 1864, did not create the office of subpoena server to the district attorney, in no manner distinguishes the case at bar from the

Southbridge Finishing Co. v. Golding

208 Misc. 846 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1955

Y. 651 ; People v. Rosenheimer, 209 N. Y. 115, 123 ; People v. Trybus, 219 N. Y. 18, 24 ; People v. Russo [Bar letto], 251 App. Div. 176 ; People v. Shapiro, 308 N. Y. 453 ; Brown v. Walker, 161 U. … In Brown v. Walker ( 161 U.

Spoolan Realty Corp. v. Haebler

147 Misc. 9 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 14, 1931

(Leach v. Fobes, 11 Gray [Mass.], 506; 71 Am. Dec. 732 ; Brown v. Smith, [C. C.] 109 Fed. 26, 29 ; Johnson v. Brooks, 93 N. Y. 337, 343 ; St. Regis Paper Co. v. Santa Clara Lumber Co., 173 id. 149; 2 Story Eq. … (Bostwick v. Hall, 191 App. Div. 610 ; Trimboli v. Kinkel, 226 N. Y. 147 ; Matter of Newman, [L. R.] 9 Ch. App. 681.) 4. Specific performance will lie as against the defendant Gnilbe Corporation.

Whitney v. Wardell

28 N.Y.S. 1118 · New York Supreme Court · May 8, 1894

Lawrence v. Brown, 5 N. Y. 394 ; Poillon v. Secor, 61 N. Y. 456 ; Pringle v. Leverich, 48 N. Y. Super. Ct. 90; Du Bois v. Lamson, 18 Wkly. Dig. 490 ; Vibbard v. Roderick, 51 Barb. 616 ; Irvin v. Conklin, 36 Barb. 64 .

Dow v. Lomenzo

52 Misc. 2d 153 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 20, 1966

The court has the power to direct the board or officer to receive the certificate of acceptance as corrected. (Matter of Battista v. Carver, 29 Misc 2d 711 , affd. 14 A D 2d 746, affd. 10 N Y 2d 867.) … (Matter of Lauer v. Board of Elections, 262 N. Y. 416 .) In a Third Department case, the court held that even a three-day late filing was acceptable. (Matter of Smith v.

State v. New York Movers Tariff Bureau, Inc.

48 Misc. 2d 225 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 14, 1965

more informed and precise determination by the Court of the scope and meaning of the statute as applied to those particular circumstances. * * # ’ Federal Maritime Board v. … jurisdiction is in the Board and not in the district court.”

Di Maggio v. Leon D. Dematteis & Son, Inc.

9 Misc. 2d 1025 · New York Supreme Court · Aug 30, 1957

It is not disputed that the County Executive and the chairman of the board of supervisors are one and the same person. … (Strauch v. Town of Oyster Bay, 263 App. Div. 833 ; see, also, McKinney’s Cons. Laws of N. Y., Book 1, Statutes, § 397.) Motion denied. Settle order on notice.

Sailesbury v. Creswell

21 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 460 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1878

(Id., see White v. Merritt, 7 N. Y., 352 .) The plaintiff cites Brown v. McIntyre ( 43 Barb., 344 ), to uphold this action. … Nor does the case of Brown v. Feeter ( 7 Wend., 301 ), aid the plaintiff.

In re the Incorporated Village of Hewlett Bay Park

48 Misc. 2d 833 · New York Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1966

As was said in Cuglar v. Power Auth. of N. Y. … (De Sena v. Gulde, 24 A D 2d 165.)

De Milia v. McGuire

101 Misc. 2d 281 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 5, 1979

complaints initially to administrative tribunals, rather than to the courts, and that they exhaust all possibilities of obtaining relief through administrative channels before appealing to the courts (Young Men’s Christian Assn. v … This has been extended to include the Board of Collective Bargaining of the City of New York (Civil Service Law, § 205, subd 5, par [d], as amd by L 1977, ch 429).

Mather v. Crawford

36 Barb. 564 · New York Supreme Court · Jun 2, 1862

This statement and estimate are to be delivered to the supervisor of the town, who is to lay it before the board of super *567 visors at their next annual meeting. … (Bartlett v. Crozier, 17 John. 452 . The People v. Commissioners of Highways of Hudson, 7 Wend. 474 . The People v. Adsit, 2 Hill, 619 . Morey v. The Town of Newfane, 8 Barb. 645 .)

Stafford v. Van Zandt

2 Johns. Cas. 66 · New York Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1800

See Brown v. Chase, 4 Mass. R. 436 . Hence in Bent v. … As to correcting judgments docketed by mistake for less than the true sum; see Hunt v. Grant, 19 Wend. 90 .

Mobil Oil Corp. v. Milton

72 Misc. 2d 505 · New York Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1972

(Matter of Thurman v. Snowden, 28 A D 2d 705; cf. Nemeroff Realty Corp. v. Kerr, 38 A D 2d 437.) … (Matter of Anderson v. Lockhardt, 62 Misc 2d 815 ; Radano v. Town of Huntington, 281 App. Div. 682 , affd. 305 N. Y. 911 .)