Case law

Board of Education v. Robinson

119 Misc. 496 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1922

Goldstein v. Curtis, 63 N. J. Eq. 454. No reason appears, so far as I can perceive, for placing a condemnation proceeding, in this regard, in a class distinct from mortgage foreclosure and specific performance actions. … Banfield Co. v. Hollenbeck, 184 App. Div. 618 . This being the situation, defendants’ contention that they did not have sufficient notice of the presentation of the petition is without avail.

Carper v. Board of County Commissioners

9 Ohio Misc. 39 · Meigs County Court of Common Pleas · Aug 16, 1966

It appears from the evidence taken upon trial of this lawsuit, that the director’s petition was received in the office of the board on March 8, 1966. … One must incorporate the title to identify the addressee, and it is his opinion the board hopes to change. There is no connotation of any action by the commissioners.

Miller v. Board of County Commissioners

3 Ohio C.C. 617 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Mar 15, 1889

See Haff v. Fuller, 45 Ohio St. 495 . The second proposition was passed upon in the introduction of the evidence. … And that the ^defendants, the Board of County Commissioners, pay*the costs of this action.

State v. Board of County Commissioners

12 Ohio Cir. Dec. 236 · Ohio Circuit Courts · Jun 21, 1901

The other moneys upon which the clerk claims the percentage, were paid to him under Secs. 1261, 1262 and 2107 v, which several sections provide for the payment of costs in criminal cases out of *239 the county treasury and … The case of State ex rel. v. Brewster, 44 Ohio St., 249 [6 N. E. Rep., 653], is cited in support of the demurrer.

Chudde v. Board of Liquor Control

66 Ohio Law. Abs. 324 · Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division · Apr 9, 1953

V. set, radio, pop-up toasters, waffle irons; and that Curly Bayne purchased “two television sets” from him “inside the bar room.” (R. 16.) … of said Board and dismisses the appeal herein.

Mallett v. Board of Liquor Control

67 Ohio Law. Abs. 482 · Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division · Apr 9, 1953

of the Board is reversed. … Entry accordingly with exceptions by counsel for the Board.

Kasson v. Board of County Commissioners

15 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 460 · Licking Circuit Court · Jul 1, 1908

While the exact question was not before the court in the ease of Lewis v. … In view of the announcement made by the Supreme Court in the case of Lear v.

Clark v. Board of County Commissioners

4 Ohio N.P. 39 · Lucas County Court of Common Pleas · Jan 6, 1897

The Circuit Court for the first circuit passed upon similar claims in the case of The Commissioners of Butler Co. v. Welliver, 12 C. C. Rep. 440, and that decision will be followed in this case.

Caldwell v. Board of County Commissioners

4 Ohio N.P. 249 · Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court · Jul 15, 1897

, the Commissioners of Cuyahoga county, are brought to recover damages from the county because of personal injuries received by the plaintiffs at the hands of a mob during the disturbance last season at the works of The Brown … With the exception of tbe case of Murphy v.

Board of County Commissioners v. Fulton

32 Ohio N.P. (n.s.) 206 · Putnam County Court of Common Pleas · Jul 19, 1933

The bid and proceedings thereon are not perfect samples of the proceedings that should have been had by the board of county commissioners, but the court believes they are sufficient to show an intention on the part of the … It is a rule of law that no person can take advantage of his or her own wrong, and, if the Bank of Ottawa Company has made it possible for the signers of the bond and board of county commissioners to accept conditions of

Mayhew v. Town Board of Marcy

58 N.Y. St. Rep. 871 · New York Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1894

Wilds v. Board of Education

103 Misc. 318 · New York Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1918

Border National Bank v. Coupland, 240 Fed. Repr. 355; Bankruptcy Act, § 47a, cl. 2. … Repr. 311; affd., 242 id. 251; Duplan Silk Co. v. Spencer, 115 id. 689.

Mckenna v. Board of Education

94 Misc. 453 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1916

The idea advanced in Eagan v. Board of Education, 115 N. Y. … See Matter of Hamburger v. Board of Education, 109 App. Div. 427 ; also Matter of Keymer, 148 N. Y. 219 ; People ex rel. Sweet v. Lyman, 157 id. 368 ; Buckbee v. Board of Education, 115 App. Div. 366 .

Ogden v. Public School Employes' Retirement Board

27 Pa. D. & C.2d 151 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County · Jul 17, 1961

Herman, J., This is an appeal from an adjudication of the Public School Employes’ Retirement Board denying to appellants any of Benjamin V. … Neither Dom v. State Employes’ Retirement Board, 345 Pa. 489 (1942), nor Hargest v.

Mahopac Teachers Ass'n v. Board of Education

67 Misc. 2d 268 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 9, 1971

(See our determination in North Salem Teachers Assn. v. Board of Educ., 67 Misc 2d 315 .) … Y. v. Board of Higher Educ. ( 67 Misc 2d 648 ). Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

Del Rosso v. Board of Elections

22 Misc. 2d 99 · New York Supreme Court · Nov 5, 1959

The returns produced by the respondent Board of Elections show that in the 8th Election District, petitioner Muckey received 7 votes; that there was 1 void ballot; and that her opponent received 15 more votes than did Muckey

Buckbee v. Board of Education

51 Misc. 295 · New York Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1906

Steinson v. Board of Education, 165 N. Y. 431 . The element of the term of the contract is, therefore^ clear. … Callahan v. Board of Education, 174 N.

Noe v. Sex Offender Registry Board

34 Mass. L. Rptr. 127 · Massachusetts Superior Court, Suffolk County · Mar 28, 2017

No. 380316 v. … See Doe v.

Mason v. Board of Trustees

50 Misc. 40 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1906

Sander v. State of New York, 182 N. Y. 400 . … Tice v. Atlantic Construction Co., 52 App. Div. 284 .

Boyce v. Board of Supervisors

43 Misc. 297 · New York Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1904

The board of health took no action but its chairman did take an active part. A board of health has nothing to do with a case of individual sickness but is- solicitous as to the public health. … The president of. the board of health, without the authority of the board, recognized the emergency and necessity for action, and perhaps by reason of the fact that the sheriff was not ready to commit himself or the county