Legal Opinion

In re Vandervoort Avenue

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 1910PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Motion to amend report of commissioners of estimate and . assessment upon the ground of mistake in assessing property for the improvement abutting that- which had been ceded to the city jmrsuant to section 994 of the Greater Kew York Charter, under an agreement th'at same should not be assessed.

1Opinion of the CourtKapper, J.

It is contended by the city that the order confirming the report of the commissioners herein is a finality and cannot be amended or modified by a party to the proceeding having the statutory notice of confirmation. I think the cases cited in support of this contention go no further than to hold that such a report cannot be attacked collaterally. People ex rel. Dady v. Supervisors, 154 N. Y. 381; Mayer v. Mayor, 101 id. 284.

In Matter of Mayor (Whitlock Avenue), 101 App. Div. 589, Mr. Justice Ingraham, writing for the court, said (p. 544) : “ The order of confirmation, when entered, therefore,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Dady v. Supervisor of GravesendNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
  2. In re The MayorAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re the Imperial Building Co.New York Supreme Court · 1910

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

Powered by the Exa API