Matter of Mott v. Krug
This text of 17 N.E.2d 129 (Matter of Mott v. Krug) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In Matter of Burke v. Cohen (265 N. Y. 210) the distinction between constitutional officers and others was abandoned. The opinion in that case referred to city offices, but the principle upon which that case was decided applies to town officers, so that article X, section 5, of the State Constitution applies to an election to fill a vacancy in a town office. Since subdivision 5 of *461 section 64 of the Town Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 62) conflicts with this constitutional provision, it must be held, to be invalid. We pass on no other question.
The order should be affirmed, without costs.
Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughran, Finch and Rippey, JJ., concur.
Order affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
17 N.E.2d 129, 278 N.Y. 457, 1938 N.Y. LEXIS 1325, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-mott-v-krug-ny-1938.