City of Buffalo v. Brooks
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtMichael J. Montesano, J.
The intervenor moves to resettle the order herein (ante, p. 492) which directed the return or sale of an automobile adjudged forfeited pursuant to section 3353 of the Public Health Law. It is urged that a finding having been made declaring the intervenor an “ owner ”, innocent of wrongdoing, the order should have directed the automobile restored to the owner without declaring* it forfeited (subd. 6, par. [a]).
I found the intervenor as the assignee of the conditional vendor vested with title to the automobile and as such an ‘ ‘ owner ’ ’ within the meaning of the statute. It is not, however,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Commercial Credit Corp. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1970
- Henry v. CastagnaroNew York Supreme Court · 1980
- Cortes v. RosettiCivil Court of the City of New York · 1962