The People Ex Rel. Farrar v. . O'Keefe
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, made December 13, 1882, which affirmed an order of Special Term, the nature of which as well as the material facts are stated in the opinion. It makes no difference whether the interest is in express terms abated by the act, so long as it expresses an amount which will pay the arrears in full.
Read the full summary
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, made December 13, 1882, which affirmed an order of Special Term, the nature of which as well as the material facts are stated in the opinion. It makes no difference whether the interest is in express terms abated by the act, so long as it expresses an amount which will pay the arrears in full. (Tilloston v. Preston, 3 Johns. 229; Johnston v. Brannan, 5 id. 268; Consequa v. Fanning, 3 Johns. Ch. 587; Stevens v. Barringer, 13 Wend. 639; Jacob v. Emmett, 11 Paige, 142; Gillespie v. Mayor, 3 Edw. 512.)…
1Opinion of the CourtDanforth, J.
The Special Term denied an application by the relators for a mandamus requiring the registrar of the city of Brooklyn to receive money tendered in payment of arrears of taxes, water rates and assessments against their real estate. The facts on which the application stood were not controverted. The relators tendered the amount of taxes and assessments with interest at six per cent from June 21, 1880, and the question presented to the court below, and upon this appeal, turns upon the true construction of an act of the legislature, passed June 21, 1880 (Laws of 1880, chap. 572), entitled “ An…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Lobban v. State ex rel. CarpenterWyoming Supreme Court · 1901
- Litchfield v. City of BrooklynNew York City Court · 1895
- State ex rel. Hoboken Manufacturers Railroad v. Mayor of HobokenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1908