Matter of City of N.Y. (Jamaica Bay)

5 N.E.2d 191, 272 N.Y. 180, 1936 N.Y. LEXIS 888
New York Court of Appeals·Decided November 24, 1936·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

*183 Per Curiam.

A single question of power in the Supreme Court is involved in the certified question.

Upon this record we find no abuse (as matter of law) of the discretionary power of the Supreme Court. (Hatch v. Central Nat. Bank, 78 N. Y. 487, 489; Matter of Tilden, 98 N. Y. 434, 439; Ladd v. Stevenson, 112 N. Y. 325.) This leads to an affirmance.

We leave the merits to be determined upon the new trial which has been granted.

The order should be affirmed, with costs, and the question certified answered in the affirmative.

Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Pinch, JJ., concur; Crane, Ch. J., taldng no part.

Order affirmed, etc.

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

Matter of City of N.Y. (Jamaica Bay), 5 N.E.2d 191, 272 N.Y. 180, 1936 N.Y. LEXIS 888 (N.Y. 1936).

5 N.E.2d 191 (Matter of City of N.Y. (Jamaica Bay)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re the City of New York
22 Misc. 2d 260 (New York Supreme Court, 1959)