Legal Opinion
Matter of Black v. O'Brien
New York Court of Appeals
Decided April 17, 1934PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Per curiam
Even if we were to assume that part of the petitioner’s salary as defined by the Constitution has been withheld, the court in the exercise of its discretion might deny the remedy of mandamus.
The order should be affirmed, with costs.
Pound, Ch. J., Crane, Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs and Crouch, JJ., concur; Kellogg, J., not sitting.
Order affirmed.
2Cited by15 opinions
- Toscano v. McGoldrickNew York Court of Appeals · 1949
- Matter of Benvenga v. La GuardiaNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
- 609 Holding Corp. v. BurkeNew York Supreme Court · 1952
- Kane v. WalshNew York Supreme Court · 1944
- Ennis v. HarnettAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.