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.
Corporations
The People of the State of New York ex rel. William C. Rice, Appellant, v. Frank Moss et al., Police Commissioners of the City of New York, Respondents
161 N.Y. 623·New York Court of Appeals·1899·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 of the State of New York ex rel. William C. Rice, Appellant, v. Frank Moss et al., Police Commissioners of the City of New York, Respondents.
People ex rel. Mice v. Moss, 42 App. Div. 196, appeal dismissed.
(Submitted November 21, 1899;
decided December 5, 1899.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the tirst judicial department, entered September 27, 1899, upon an order affirming an order of Special Term dismissing an alternative writ of mandamus.
Francis G. Moore and Mortimer A. Runger for appellant.
John Whalen, Corporation Counsel (Theodore Connoly and Terence Farley, of counsel), for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal dismissed, with costs, on authority of People ex rel. Durant Land Imp. Co. v. Jeroloman (139 N. Y. 14); People ex rel. Jacobus v. Van Wyck (157 N. Y. 495) and People ex rel. Steinson v. Board of Education (158 N. Y. 125).
All concur.