County of Herkimer v. Hess

240 A.D. 1013
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 15, 1933
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 240 A.D. 1013 (County of Herkimer v. Hess) 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
County of Herkimer v. Hess, 240 A.D. 1013 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Opinion

Submitted controversy determined in favor of the defendant Floyd A. Clayton, without costs. Memorandum. We treat this submitted controversy for a declaratory judgment as in the nature of a quo warranto between the two defendants. The Constitution of the State makes no provision for the term of office of supervisor (N. Y. Const, art. 3, § 26). That matter is left to the Legislature (N. Y. Const, art. 10, § 3). It was at all times within the power of the Legislature to fix the term of office even though it resulted in the shortening of the term of a previously elected supervisor. (People ex rel. Mitchell v. Sturgis, 156 N. Y. 580. See Williams v. United States, 289 U. S. 553.) All concur.

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

Related

Twin City Service Station, Inc. v. City of North Tonawanda
162 Misc. 271 (New York Supreme Court, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
240 A.D. 1013, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/county-of-herkimer-v-hess-nyappdiv-1933.