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 Application of the City of New York, Appellant, for a Writ of Certiorari against Richard Mitchell et al., as Assessors of the Town of Southeast, Respondents, 1906 — 183 N.Y. 570 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the Application of the City of New York, Appellant, for a Writ of Certiorari against Richard Mitchell et al., as Assessors of the Town of Southeast, Respondents
183 N.Y. 570·New York Court of Appeals·1906·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 Application of the City of New York, Appellant, for a Writ of Certiorari against Richard Mitchell et al., as Assessors of the Town of Southeast, Respondents.
(Argued January 8, 1906;
decided January 16, 1906.)
[MAJORITY]
Motion to amend remittitur so as to provide that “ the order and judqment appealed from be affirmed, with costs.” (See 183 N. Y. 245.)
Motion denied, without costs. What appears to be designated in the record on appeal as a judgment of the Appellate Division is, under sections 2141 and 2143 of the Code of Civil Procedure, denominated a final order. It is that order which has been affirmed by this court, and the application is, therefore, unnecessary ; we prefer to adhere to the nomenclature prescribed by the Code.