Hyperlawhypertext legal database People ex rel. Park Circle Amusement Co. v. Board of Police 72 N.Y.S. 583

← Cases

People ex rel. Park Circle Amusement Co. v. Board of Police

72 N.Y.S. 583 Court N.Y. Sup. Ct. English

Delivered by FITZGERALD, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 583
(36 Misc. Rep. 89.)
PEOPLE ex rel. PARK CIRCLE AMUSEMENT CO. v. BOARD OF POLICE OF CITY OF NEW YORK.
(Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County.
October, 1901.)

Headnote

Theatrical Licenses.
The board of police of the city of New York has power to grant or deny a theatrical license, in its discretion.
Application by the people, on the relation of the Park Circle. Amusement Company, for a writ of mandamus to the board of police of the city of New York.
Writ denied.
Howe & Hummel, for relator.
Chase Mellen, for respondent.

Relator, a domestic corporation, a§ks that the peremptory writ of mandamus issue out of the court, directing the respondent to grant it a theatrical license for the premises situated at die southwest corner of Sixtieth street and Broadway. Sections 1472, 1473, and 1474 of the Greater New York charter substantially re-enact the provisions of sections 1998, 1999, and 2000 of chapter 410, Laws 1882, with the exception that the powers conferred upon the mayor by the earlier act are now vested in the police department. Section 1999 of the consolidation act was con

p. 584
strued In People ex rel. Worth v. Grant, 58 Hun, 455 , 12 N. Y. Supp. 879 ) holding- that the mayor might, in his discretion, refuse a license to an applicant who tendered payment of the license fee. The respondent herein was acting within its authority in denying relator’s application, notwithstanding the fact that it deposited the amount of the fee with the respondent’s auditor, as required by law, at the time of making the application. By the terms of the receipt given for the deposit it was expressly stated that “money deposited will be returned upon application to the chief clerk if license is not granted.” In People ex rel. Schwab v. Grant, 126 N. Y. 473 , 27 N. E. 964 , the discretion of the mayor was held not reviewable upon mandamus. The affidavits submitted by the respondent, even if the court had the power, refute the contention that its decision was arbitrary or ill considered, but, on the contrary, tend to establish the fact that it was founded upon proper investigation and consideration.

-Motion denied, with costs.

Cases cited