Legal Opinion

Burford v. Mayor of New York

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

Decided February 25, 1898PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from, special term. Action by Thomas W. Burford against the mayor, aldermen, and commonalty of the city of New York. From a judgment dismissing the complaint, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, plaintiff appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtPatterson, J.

On the argument of this cause, counsel declared that the only question for the consideration of the court on this appeal was the sufficiency of the proof made by the plaintiff of the service of the notice of claim required to be filed with the corporation counsel by chapter 572 of the Laws of 1886. It appeared in evidence that a notice sufficient in form was served upon the comptroller of the city of New York, but we have held that such a notice, even if traced into the hands of the corporation counsel, is not sufficient compliance with the requirement of the law. Missano v. City of New York,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gates v. . StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  2. Missano v. The Mayor, Aldermen & Commonalty of the City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
  3. McMahon v. MayorAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Sheehy v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
  2. Weis Mfg. Co. Steel Product Co. v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API