Stowell v. Santoro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stowell v. Santoro

254 A.D. 903, 5 N.Y.S.2d 520, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8245

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 24, 1938

StatusPublished

This text of 254 A.D. 903 (Stowell v. Santoro) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Stowell v. Santoro, 254 A.D. 903, 5 N.Y.S.2d 520, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8245 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act, for a review of the determination of the board of trustees of the village of Mamaroneck in dismissing the petitioner from the office of police chief after a hearing on stated charges. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs. In reaching this determination the bribery charge has not been considered. There is ample evidence in the record to sustain the other charges. Davis, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., dissents. The first charge had been disposed of effectively on a previous trial. The second charge should be remitted to the trustees for retrial. (People ex rel, Gilson v. Gibbons, 231 N. Y. 171.)

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

Proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act, for a review of the determination of the board of trustees of the village of Mamaroneck in dismissing the petitioner from the office of police chief after a hearing on stated charges. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs. In reaching this determination the bribery charge has not been considered. There is ample evidence in the record to sustain the other charges. Davis, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., dissents. The first charge had been disposed of effectively on a previous trial. The second charge should be remitted to the trustees for retrial. (People ex rel, Gilson v. Gibbons, 231 N. Y. 171.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D. 903, 5 N.Y.S.2d 520, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8245, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stowell-v-santoro-nyappdiv-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack