Legal Opinion

Maas v. Dermody

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

Decided May 25, 1939PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Such rights as plaintiffs have to the moneys for which this judgment bas been obtained against defendant as supervisor of the town of Cocheeton arise under section 185 of the Town Law. The proper remedy was not a common-law action but a proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act, which possibly should have been preceded by audit of the claim by the town board. (Matter of DeAngelis v. Laino, 260 N. Y. 661; Matter of Hart v. Perkins, 258 id. 61; People ex rel. McCabe v. Matthies, 179 id. 242; Matter of Hiscox v. Holmes, 237 App. Div. 240; Fabric Fire Hose Co. v. Town of Whitestown,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hiscox v. HolmesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
  2. Matter of Deangelis v. LainoNew York Court of Appeals · 1932

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Maglio v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API