Majority
p. 633(Argued February 26, 1918; decided April 5, 1918.)
In the Matter of the Application of Milo R. Maltbie, Chamberlain of the City of New York, and County Treasurer of the County of New York, Respondent, for Examination of the New York and Philadelphia Coal and Coke Company, Appellant, in Supplementary Proceedings.
Headnote
Matter of Maltbie, 179 App. Div. 395 , reversed.Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered July 6, 1917, which affirmed an
p. 634
order of Special Term denying a motion to vacate an order of Special Term directing the examination of the appellant in supplementary proceedings instituted under section 299 of the Tax Law for the purpose of collecting taxes assessed against a non-resident corporation upon its capital invested in its business within the city of New York.
The following questions were certified: “1. On the facts shown by the record herein, did the Supreme Court of the state of New York have jurisdiction to grant the order dated October 27, 1916, for the examination of this non-resident foreign corporation in supplementary proceedings pursuant to section 299 of the Tax Law of the state of New York? 2. Do supplementary proceedings under section 299 of said Tax Law apply to the collection of taxes in the city of New York? ”
Henry M. Powell and Frank H. Richmond for appellant.
W. N. Seligsberg and Alex. L. Strouse for Reliance Motion Picture Corporation, amicus curiae.
William P. Burr, Corporation Counsel (John P. O’Brien and Joshua Sprayregen oí counsel), for respondent.
Order of Appellate Division reversed and proceeding dismissed, with costs in all courts. First question certified answered in the negative. Second question certified not answered, on opinion in Matter of Maltbie v. Lobsitz Mills Co. ( 223 N. Y. 227 ).
Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Cuddeback, Cardozo, Pound and Andrews, JJ.
Cases cited
- In re Maltbie 223 N. Y. 227 p. 634