Boyce v. Russell

2 Cow. 444
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 15, 1824
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 2 Cow. 444 (Boyce v. Russell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Boyce v. Russell, 2 Cow. 444 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1824).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The town collector has ño right to pAy off claims upon the county in this manner. Hé must pay all the ihoñey which he collects to the county treasürér, éxcépt in those cases wherein he is otherwise directed by statute. Doty might have had his action against the treasurer had he refused to pay him without sufficient cause. The rule is, that when the party has a remedy by action, this Court will not interfere by mandamus. Boyce does not come for relief as a public officer ; for he has travelled beyond the line of his duty ; and we must regard his acts as those of Any other individual;

Motion denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People ex rel. Port Chester Savings Bank v. Cromwell
45 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 384 (New York Supreme Court, 1885)
State ex rel. Bornefeld v. Rombauer
46 Mo. 155 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1870)
People Ex Rel. Fiedler v. Mead
24 N.Y. 114 (New York Court of Appeals, 1861)
People Ex Rel. Mygatt v. Supervisors of Chenango County
11 N.Y. 563 (New York Court of Appeals, 1854)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 Cow. 444, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boyce-v-russell-nysupct-1824.