Matter of Stowell v. Santoro

New York Court of Appeals

Matter of Stowell v. Santoro

17 N.E.2d 108, 278 N.Y. 427, 1938 N.Y. LEXIS 1320

New York Court of Appeals·Decided October 11, 1938·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The record shows that the village trustees voted that the petitioner was guilty of the acts alleged only by the first charge. This charge was not considered at the Appellate Division. It was there held that the evidence amply sustained the other charges. The record, however, does not show that any action was taken by the trustees on those charges.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the matter remitted to the Appellate Division for further consideration and disposition in accordance with this opinion, without costs.

Crane, Ch. J., O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughran, Finch and Bjppey, JJ., concur; Lehman, J., taking no part.

Ordered accordingly.

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

Per Curiam.

The record shows that the village trustees voted that the petitioner was guilty of the acts alleged only by the first charge. This charge was not considered at the Appellate Division. It was there held that the evidence amply sustained the other charges. The record, however, does not show that any action was taken by the trustees on those charges.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the matter remitted to the Appellate Division for further consideration and disposition in accordance with this opinion, without costs.

Crane, Ch. J., O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughran, Finch and Bjppey, JJ., concur; Lehman, J., taking no part.

Ordered accordingly.

Matter of Stowell v. Santoro, 17 N.E.2d 108, 278 N.Y. 427, 1938 N.Y. LEXIS 1320 (N.Y. 1938).

Pincite

17 N.E.2d 108 (Matter of Stowell v. Santoro) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related