Legal Opinion · Dissent

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

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided May 5, 1905Published

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.

1Dissent

HATCH, J. (dissenting).

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…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People ex rel. Sherwin-Williams Co. v. BarkerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
  2. People ex rel. Durand-Ruel v. WellsNew York Supreme Court · 1903

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API