Howard v. . the City of New York

138 N.E. 424, 234 N.Y. 505, 1922 N.Y. LEXIS 667
New York Court of Appeals·Decided July 12, 1922·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

For some reason the question has not been raised whether the statute (L. 1917, ch. 813) under which recovery has been allowed in this action is constitutional so far as it permits municipalities to purchase on credit commodities for resale. Under the provisions of the Constitution, especially article 8, section 10, which provides that no city shall be allowed to incur any indebtedness except for city purposes, this question necessarily arises and as it involves considerations of general interest and public policy, we feel that it may not be waived by the appellant but should be considered by the court. Re-argument ordered. The question which the court desires to have argued is whether chapter 813 of the Laws of 1917 conflicts. with the provisions of the Constitution of the state of New York, especially article 8, section 10.

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

Howard v. . the City of New York, 138 N.E. 424, 234 N.Y. 505, 1922 N.Y. LEXIS 667 (N.Y. 1922).

138 N.E. 424 (Howard v. . the City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.