In re Phillies

New York Court of Appeals

In re Phillies

187 N.E.2d 797, 12 N.Y.2d 876, 237 N.Y.S.2d 347, 1962 N.Y. LEXIS 829

New York Court of Appeals·Decided December 31, 1962·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Motion denied.

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Burke and Foster. Judges Froessel and Van Voorhis concur in the following memorandum: We do not agree that grievous error [877]*877was committed by the learned Referee in securing a copy of the provisions of the New York City Police Department Eules and Procedures adopted pursuant to law (Public Officers Law, § 66-a). A trial or appellate court may take judicial notice of a rule or regulation of an executive department or officer of any city within the State (Civ. Prac. Act, § 344-a, subd. A, par. 4; Administrative Code of City of New York, § 982-8.0).

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

Motion denied.

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Burke and Foster. Judges Froessel and Van Voorhis concur in the following memorandum: We do not agree that grievous error [877]*877was committed by the learned Referee in securing a copy of the provisions of the New York City Police Department Eules and Procedures adopted pursuant to law (Public Officers Law, § 66-a). A trial or appellate court may take judicial notice of a rule or regulation of an executive department or officer of any city within the State (Civ. Prac. Act, § 344-a, subd. A, par. 4; Administrative Code of City of New York, § 982-8.0).

In re Phillies, 187 N.E.2d 797, 12 N.Y.2d 876, 237 N.Y.S.2d 347, 1962 N.Y. LEXIS 829 (N.Y. 1962).

Pincite

187 N.E.2d 797 (In re Phillies) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related