People ex rel. Tucker v. Opdyke
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an application for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the mayor of the city of Hew York to discharge a duty imposed upon him hy the 6th section of the act entitled “An act relating to the hoard of supervisors of the county of Hew York,” passed April 15, 1857, (Laws of 1857, vol. 2, p. 286,) which provides.as follows: “All moneys drawn from the treasury, hy authority of the hoard of supervisors, shall he upon vouchers for the expenditure thereof, examined and…
Read the full summary
THIS was an application for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the mayor of the city of Hew York to discharge a duty imposed upon him hy the 6th section of the act entitled “An act relating to the hoard of supervisors of the county of Hew York,” passed April 15, 1857, (Laws of 1857, vol. 2, p. 286,) which provides.as follows: “All moneys drawn from the treasury, hy authority of the hoard of supervisors, shall he upon vouchers for the expenditure thereof, examined and allowed h'y the auditor, and approved hy the comptroller, and no such moneys shall he drawn therefrom, except on the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Leonard, J.
The mayor refuses to countersign a warrant drawn by the comptroller for money author*308ized by the board of supervisors to be drawn from the county treasury pursuant to a previous appropriation, for services, &c., in the erection of the court house; the vouchers therefor having been examined and allowed by the auditor, and approved by the comptroller. The mayor insists that the board of supervisors had no authority to incur these expenditures; that the commissioners of the new city hall, appointed under an act entitled “An act in relation to the city hall, in the city of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State ex rel. Maddaugh v. RitterWashington Supreme Court · 1913
- Missouri ex rel. Barricelli v. NoonanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1894