Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1905

People ex rel. Farcy & Oppenheim Co. v. Wells

People ex rel. Farcy & Oppenheim Co. v. Wells
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided May 5, 1905 · Hatch
93 N.Y.S. 1143 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

George S. Coleman, for appellants., Frederic R. Coudert, for respondent.

People ex rel. Farcy & Oppenheim Co. v. Wells

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed, with costs, on the opinion in People ex rel. Sherwin Williams Co. v. Barker, 5 App. Div. 246, 39 N. Y. Supp. 151.

Dissenting Opinion

HATCH, J. (dissenting).

I am unable to agree that the case of People ex rel. Sherwin Williams Co. v. Barker, 5 App. Div. 246, 39 N. Y. Supp. 151, is controlling of the questions presented by this appeal. On the contrary, I think the facts are in all essential respects the same as was presented to the court in People ex rel. Durand-Ruel v. Wells, 41 Misc. Rep. 144, 83 N. Y. Supp. 936, affirmed by this court on appeal 92 App. Div. 622, 87 N. Y. Supp. 1144. The distinction between that and the Sherwin Williams Case and the authorities upon which it was based is clearly pointed out by Mr. Justice Leventritt in his opinion. The order reducing the assessment should therefore be reversed, and the assessment as made confirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.