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.
Tax
The People ex rel. The Addison and Elkland Plank-road Company, Appellants, v. Simeon Freeman et al., Assessors, etc., Respondents
52 N.Y. 656·New York Court of Appeals·1873·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. The Addison and Elkland Plank-road Company, Appellants, v. Simeon Freeman et al., Assessors, etc., Respondents.
(Argued March 27, 1873;
decided May 6, 1873.)
A judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, affirming a decision of a county judge, deciding that a plank-road company is liable to taxation under the act in relation to plank and turnpike roads (Laws of 1854, chap. 87), is not reviewable in this court.
The relator appealed from an assessment made against it by defendants, assessors of the town of Tuscarora, Steu-. ben county, under the provision of the act in relation to plank and turnpike roads (Laws of 1854, chap. 87, § 4), which provides that, in case of disagreement between any such company and assessors concerning exemption from taxation claimed by the company, the latter may appeal to the county judge, whose decision shall be final.
The county judge of said county decided that the relator was liable to taxation under said act.
Upon 'return to a writ of certiorari, the said decision was affirmed by the General Term. Held, that whatever may have been the right of the Supreme Court to review the decision, and to see that the inferior tribunal had kept within its jurisdiction, the decision of the Supreme Court was conclusive, and was not reviewable here.
J. W. JDminy for the appellants.
William Hv/msey for the respondents.
[MAJORITY — Peokham, J.,]
Peokham, J.,
reads for dismissal of appeal.
All concur.
Appeal dismissed.