Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta People ex rel. Boyle v. Cruise 231 N.Y. 639

← Cases

People ex rel. Boyle v. Cruise

231 N.Y. 639 Court N.Y. Decision date 1921-07-14 English

Contents

Majority

p. 639
The People of the State of New York ex rel. Edward F. Boyle, Appellant, v. Michael J. Cruise, as City Clerk of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.

Headnote

Constitutional law — apportionment law — repassage of bill after disapproval by mayor — where bill had been returned before its repassage statute valid irrespective of whether fifteen days allowed for consideration by mayor had expired.
People ex rel. Boyle v. Cruise, 197 App. Div. 705 , affirmed.
(Argued July 13, 1921;
decided July 14, 1921.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered July 1, 1921, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the respondents herein to make and transmit to the board of elections of the city of New York the notice as provided in section 293 of the Election Law, which notice shall include the number of aldermen to
p. 640
be voted for in the city of New York at the coming general election, on the basis of apportionment contained in section 19 of the Greater New York charter, as amended by the Laws of 1916, chapter 540, instead of in accordance with the apportionment contained in chapter 670 of the Laws of 1921. The relator in this proceeding attacks the constitutionality of chapter 670 of the Laws of 1921 upon ground that the legislature repassed the act before the expiration of the fifteen days allowed to the mayor of the city of New York to consider and return the same under section 2 of article 12 of the State Constitution.
John Godfrey Saxe, Robert L. Luce, John Ingle, Jr., Edward S. Dore and George W. Olvany for appellant.
John P. O’Brien, Corporation Counsel, for respondents.
Charles D. Newton, Attorney-General (Robert P. Beyer of counsel), for State of New York.
Leonard J. Obermeier for Republican County Committee, New York County, intervener. ,

Order affirmed, with costs, on the ground that the bill, with the disapproval of the mayor, having been returned before its repassage, the statute is valid irrespective of the date from which fifteen days are to be computed under section 2 of article 12 of the Constitution of the state) no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.