Legal Opinion

In re Brush

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

Decided May 7, 1902Published

Appeal from special term. Application by Edward F. Brush for recount of votes cast for the office of mayor of the city of Mt. Vernon, and for a writ of mandamus to various election officials ordering a recount. From an order granting the application, Edwin A. Fiske, an intervener, appeals.

1Per curiam

In our former opinion (75 N. Y. Supp. 285) we intended to afford to the relator only such relief in these proceedings as was authorized by the decision in Feeney’s Case, 23 App. Div. 201, 48 N. Y. Supp. 866, affirmed 156 N. Y. 36, 50 N. E. 425, and by section 114 of the Election Law (Laws 1896, c. 909). But the learned special term was excusably misled by our use of the word “recanvass,” which was not intended to sanction a second canvass of the same character as that required at the close of the election. We intended only *598.to hold that, when the proceedings included the proper parties, the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Feeny v. . Bd. of CanvassersNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
  2. People ex rel. Feeny v. Board of CanvassersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
  3. In re BrushAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902

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

Powered by the Exa API