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 City of Rochester, Appellant, v. Joseph B. Bloss, Respondent, 1903 — 173 N.Y. 646 · caselaw · US
Tax
In the Matter of The City of Rochester, Appellant, v. Joseph B. Bloss, Respondent
173 N.Y. 646·New York Court of Appeals·1903·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 City of Rochester, Appellant, v. Joseph B. Bloss, Respondent.
Matter of City of Rochester v. Bloss, 77 App. Div. 28, affirmed.
(Argued February 9, 1903;
decided Febuary 24, 1903.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered November 28, 1902, which reversed an order of the Monroe County Court denying a motion to vacate an order requiring Joseph B. Bloss to appear and be examined concerning his property in a proceeding to enforce the collection of an unpaid tax upon personal property.
William A. Sutherland for appellant.
Isaac Adler for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Martin and Vann, JJ. Not voting; O’Brien and Werner, JJ.