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.
The People ex rel. James O'Toole et al., Appellants, v. The Board of Excise of the City of Brooklyn, Respondent, 1892 — 133 N.Y. 683 · caselaw · US
General
The People ex rel. James O'Toole et al., Appellants, v. The Board of Excise of the City of Brooklyn, Respondent
133 N.Y. 683·New York Court of Appeals·1892·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
The People ex rel. James O’Toole et al., Appellants, v. The Board of Excise of the City of Brooklyn, Respondent.
(Argued May 27, 1892;
decided June 17, 1892.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the City Court of Brooklyn, entered upon an order made December 29, 1891, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying an, application for a writ of mandamus.
Jbsiah T. Marea/n for appellants.
id A. MeCloskey for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion below.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.