Cedar v. Lawes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cedar v. Lawes

249 A.D. 821, 292 N.Y.S. 378

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 8, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 249 A.D. 821 (Cedar v. Lawes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cedar v. Lawes, 249 A.D. 821, 292 N.Y.S. 378 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding instituted by the petitioner, detained in State prison under a sentence for the term of his natural life imposed upon him December 10, 1928, upon conviction of the crime of grand larceny in the second degree, fourth offense, for a peremptory mandamus order directing the respondents, the warden and the Prison Board of Sing Sing Prison, to meet and determine forthwith the amount of commutation and compensation that they shaU recommend to be aUowed to the petitioner [822]*822and io forward to the Governor of the State of New York a report to the effect that the prisoner-petitioner is a prisoner entitled to be released at once because of commutation and compensation earned by him; order denying application for peremptory mandamus order unanimously affirmed as a matter of law and not in the exercise of discretion. No opinion. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ.

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

In a proceeding instituted by the petitioner, detained in State prison under a sentence for the term of his natural life imposed upon him December 10, 1928, upon conviction of the crime of grand larceny in the second degree, fourth offense, for a peremptory mandamus order directing the respondents, the warden and the Prison Board of Sing Sing Prison, to meet and determine forthwith the amount of commutation and compensation that they shaU recommend to be aUowed to the petitioner [822]*822and io forward to the Governor of the State of New York a report to the effect that the prisoner-petitioner is a prisoner entitled to be released at once because of commutation and compensation earned by him; order denying application for peremptory mandamus order unanimously affirmed as a matter of law and not in the exercise of discretion. No opinion. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D. 821, 292 N.Y.S. 378, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cedar-v-lawes-nyappdiv-1937.