De Leyer v. . Britt, 106 N.E. 57 (N.Y. 1914). · Go Syfert
Search
De Leyer v. . Britt, 106 N.E. 57 (N.Y. 1914). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
John A. De Leyer, Respondent,
v.
J. Gabriel Britt Et Al., as Commissioners of Election of the City of New York, Et Al., Appellants
New York Court of Appeals.
Jul 14, 1914.
106 N.E. 57
1914 N.Y. LEXIS 927
Frank L. Polk, Corporation Counsel ( Terence Farley of counsel), for appellants. John T. Dooling, Herbert R. Limburg and Frederick C. Hunter for respondent.
<italic>Per Curiam</italic>..
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published
Per Curiam.

The parties. to a question in difference may submit it to the court pursuant to section 1279 of the[*566] Code of Civil Procedure if it might be the subject of an action. A mandamus proceeding is not an action, and the Appellate Division, therefore, did not have jurisdic-' tion to direct the issuance of a peremptory writ upon the submission of a controversy pursuant to said section. However, this court has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. We have examined the question involved because of its public importance and have reached the conclusion that the order should be reversed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Ingraham, P. J., below, and because the Appellate Division did not have jurisdiction to make it.

Willard Bartlett, Ch. J., Werner, Hiscock, Collin, Hogan, Miller and Cardozo, JJ., concur.

Order reversed.