Hyperlawhypertext legal database People ex rel. Farcy & Oppenheim Co. v. Wells 93 N.Y.S. 1143

← Cases

People ex rel. Farcy & Oppenheim Co. v. Wells

93 N.Y.S. 1143 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1905-05-05 English

Decision Majority — PER CURIAM. · Dissent — HATCH, J. (dissenting).

Contents
p. 1143
PEOPLE ex rel. FARCY & OPPENHEIM CO., Respondent, v. WELLS et al., Tax Com’rs, Appellants.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
May 5, 1905.)

Headnote

Appeal from Special Term. Certiorari by the people of the state of New York, on the relation of the Farcy & Oppenheim Company, to review a determination of James L. Wells and others, commissioners of taxes and assessments of the city of New York. From an order reducing„ the assessment ( 87 N. Y. Supp. 84 ), defendants appeal. Affirmed.
George S. Coleman, for appellants.
Frederic R. Coudert, for respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs, on the opinion in People ex rel. Sherwin Williams Co. v. Barker, 5 App. Div. 246 , 39 N. Y. Supp. 151 .

I am unable to agree that the case of People ex rel. Sherwin Williams Co. v. Barker, 5 App. Div. 246 , 39 N. Y. Supp. 151 , is controlling of the questions presented by this appeal. On the contrary, I think the facts are in all essential respects the same as was presented to the court in People ex rel. Durand-Ruel v. Wells, 41 Misc. Rep. 144 , 83 N. Y. Supp. 936 , affirmed by this court on appeal 92 App. Div. 622 , 87 N. Y. Supp. 1144 . The distinction between that and the Sherwin Williams Case and the authorities upon which it was based is clearly pointed out by Mr. Justice Leventritt in his opinion. The order reducing the assessment should therefore be reversed, and the assessment as made confirmed.

Cases cited