General
In the Matter of the Application of Rufus T. Peck, Respondent, for a Writ of Mandamus, v. The State Board of Canvassers, Appellant; The Same, Respondent, v. The County Board of Canvassers of Onondaga County, Appellant
129 N.Y. 652·New York Court of Appeals·1891·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 Rufus T. Peck, Respondent, for a Writ of Mandamus, v. The State Board of Canvassers, Appellant. The Same, Respondent, v. The County Board of Canvassers of Onondaga County, Appellant.
(Argued December 11, 1891;
decided December 29, 1891.)
Appeals from orders of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, made December 7, .1891,which affirmed orders of Special Term directing a writ of peremptory" mandamus to issue in each of the above proceedings.
I. H. Maynard and Delos McCurdy for appellants.
William Nottingham for respondent.
Joseph H. Choate, William, A. Sutherland and Matthew Hale for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to reverse and deny applications; no opinion.
All concur.
Orders reversed and applications denied.