Legal Opinion
People ex rel. McLaughlin v. Prendergast
New York Supreme Court
Decided December 15, 1910PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Mandamus to compel payment of a claim.
1Opinion of the CourtStapleton, J.
The claim upon which this application is founded has not been audited. The charges for the services alleged to have been performed have not been certified- to he just and reasonable. These are indispensable requirements where the remedy by mandamus is invoked. Greater N. Y. charter, §§ 149, 151.
People ex rel. Smith v. Flagg, 17 N. Y. 584, states the law of this State applicable to the situation presented here, *7and the cases in which writs have been granted are readily distinguishable.
The relator contends that proof of lawful employment, performance of the work he was engaged to do and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Smith v. FlaggNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- People ex rel. Crane v. AhearnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
3Cited by2 opinions
- McLaughlin v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
- N. P. Nelson Iron Works, Inc. v. BerryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933