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 of the State of New York ex rel. The New York City Church Extension and Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, Appellant, v. Bird S. Coler, as Comptroller of the City of New York, Respondent, 1901 — 168 N.Y. 644 · caselaw · US
Corporations
The People of the State of New York ex rel. The New York City Church Extension and Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, Appellant, v. Bird S. Coler, as Comptroller of the City of New York, Respondent
168 N.Y. 644·New York Court of Appeals·1901·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. The New York City Church Extension and Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, Appellant, v. Bird S. Coler, as Comptroller of the City of New York, Respondent.
People ex rel. N. Y. City Church, etc., Socy. v. Coler, 60 App. Div. 77, affirmed.
(Argued October 3, 1901;
decided October 22, 1901.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 25,1901, which reversed an order of Special Term granting the motion of relator for a peremptory writ of mandamus requiring the defendant- to pay an award made in a street opening proceeding together with interest on the same.
Ola/rence G. Ferris for appellant.
John Whalen, Corporation Counsel (Theodore Gonnoly John P. Dunn and Thomas O. Blake of counsel), for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs, on the prevailing opinion below.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Martin, Yann and Landon, JJ.