Miller v. City of Amsterdam

New York Supreme Court

Miller v. City of Amsterdam

28 N.Y.S. 1021, 60 N.Y. St. Rep. 510

New York Supreme Court·Decided May 8, 1894·Published

Opinion

PUTNAM, J.

I have looked over these cases, and it seems to me that it is unnecessary to write an opinion. The conclusion of the referee that a majority of the taxpayers on the street did not sign the petition seems sustained by the evidence, and, in the absence of the signatures of such majority, the defendant’s trustees had no power to act. I do' not think that defendant’s trustees could obtain jurisdiction by an erroneous finding of a fact necessary to confer jurisdiction. See Jex v. Mayor, 103 N. Y. 536-539, 9 N. E. 39; Cag[1024]*1024win v. Town of Hancock, 84 N. Y. 532; Lathrop v. City of Buffalo, 3 Abb. Dec. 30; Tingue v. Village of Port Chester, 101 N. Y. 294, 4 N. E. 625. All concur.

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

PUTNAM, J.

I have looked over these cases, and it seems to me that it is unnecessary to write an opinion. The conclusion of the referee that a majority of the taxpayers on the street did not sign the petition seems sustained by the evidence, and, in the absence of the signatures of such majority, the defendant’s trustees had no power to act. I do' not think that defendant’s trustees could obtain jurisdiction by an erroneous finding of a fact necessary to confer jurisdiction. See Jex v. Mayor, 103 N. Y. 536-539, 9 N. E. 39; Cag[1024]*1024win v. Town of Hancock, 84 N. Y. 532; Lathrop v. City of Buffalo, 3 Abb. Dec. 30; Tingue v. Village of Port Chester, 101 N. Y. 294, 4 N. E. 625. All concur.

Miller v. City of Amsterdam, 28 N.Y.S. 1021, 60 N.Y. St. Rep. 510 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1894).

Pincite

28 N.Y.S. 1021 (Miller v. City of Amsterdam) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related