Legal Opinion

In re O'Rourke

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1894PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Application for a writ of mandamus to compel the mayor of Brooklyn to issue a license to a place of public amusement.

1Opinion of the CourtGaynor, J.

Though no briefs were submitted, this case is by no means plain. The petitioner applied to the mayor of the city of Brooklyn to license a certain building in the thirty-first ward (formerly the town of Gravesend) for the purpose of public exhibitions and contests in athletic games, including rowing, bicycling, club swinging, fencing, wrestling, boxing, and was refused. The license applied for concededly comes under the head of “places of public amusement,” both in the charter and the ordinances of the city of Brooklyn. The charter act (Chap. 583, Laws 1888, § 12, tit. 2) provides in so many…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Schwab v. . GrantNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  2. People ex rel. Worth v. GrantNew York Supreme Court · 1890

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. People v. De La MaterMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
  2. People ex rel. Cumisky v. WursterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
  3. Russell v. HarrisonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  4. State Ex Rel. Bryant v. CarterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  5. Walter v. PenningtonDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1928

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API