Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
In the Matter of the Petition of William T. Van Tassell, Respondent, v. John Derrenbacher, as County Treasurer, etc., Appellant, 1890 — 123 N.Y. 661 · caselaw · US
Tax
In the Matter of the Petition of William T. Van Tassell, Respondent, v. John Derrenbacher, as County Treasurer, etc., Appellant
123 N.Y. 661·New York Court of Appeals·1890·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
In the Matter of the Petition of William T. Van Tassell, Respondent, v. John Derrenbacher, as County Treasurer, etc., Appellant.
(Argued October 20, 1890;
decided December 2, 1890.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, made May 26, 1890, which affirmed an order made by the county judge of Ulster county commanding the treasurer of said county to comply with the statutes in reference to the application of taxes collected from a railroad company.
A. T. Clearwater for appellant.
Augustus H. Van Buren for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion below.
All concur.
Order affirmed.