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. William K. Churchyard, Respondent, v. The Board of Councilmen of the City of Buffalo, Appellant; The People ex rel. Frank J. Ihlig, Respondent, v. The Same, Appellant, 1892 — 135 N.Y. 660 · caselaw · US
General
The People ex rel. William K. Churchyard, Respondent, v. The Board of Councilmen of the City of Buffalo, Appellant; The People ex rel. Frank J. Ihlig, Respondent, v. The Same, Appellant
135 N.Y. 660·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. William K. Churchyard, Respondent, v. The Board of Councilmen of the City of Buffalo, Appellant. The People ex rel. Frank J. Ihlig, Respondent, v. The Same, Appellant.
(Argued October 17, 1892;
decided October 28, 1892.)
Appeal from orders of the General Term of the Superior Court of Buffalo, made July 20, 1892, which directed a peremptory writ of mandamus to issue requiring defendants to approve of certain warrants drawn in favor of the relators in payment of salary as police commissioners of the city of Buffalo.
Philip A. Laing for appellant.
Frank 0. Laughlim, for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; on opinion of Hatch, J., below.
All concur.
Orders affirmed.