Whitney v. Hall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Whitney v. Hall

23 A.D.2d 964, 261 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4144

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

DecidedMay 20, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.D.2d 964 (Whitney v. Hall) 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

Whitney v. Hall, 23 A.D.2d 964, 261 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4144 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed and proceedings dismissed, without costs of this appeal to any party. Memorandum: This appeal is from an order in an article 78 proceeding which mandates the President of the Village of Ilion and the members of its Board of Trustees to officially withdraw a certain map of the village as an authorized document. There is nothing in the record before this court to show that this map is required by law or has ever been officially adopted by the village as an authorized document or otherwise. Indeed this was conceded by the respondent at oral argument of this appeal. It is not contended that the map gives the village title to any of the respondent’s real property. Since the village has taken no illegal action with respect to this map (indeed it has taken no action at all), mandamus does not lie. (Appeal from order of Special Term, directing respondents to withdraw a map of Village of Ilion.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Henry and Noonan, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed and proceedings dismissed, without costs of this appeal to any party. Memorandum: This appeal is from an order in an article 78 proceeding which mandates the President of the Village of Ilion and the members of its Board of Trustees to officially withdraw a certain map of the village as an authorized document. There is nothing in the record before this court to show that this map is required by law or has ever been officially adopted by the village as an authorized document or otherwise. Indeed this was conceded by the respondent at oral argument of this appeal. It is not contended that the map gives the village title to any of the respondent’s real property. Since the village has taken no illegal action with respect to this map (indeed it has taken no action at all), mandamus does not lie. (Appeal from order of Special Term, directing respondents to withdraw a map of Village of Ilion.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Henry and Noonan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 964, 261 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whitney-v-hall-nyappdiv-1965.