TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

O'Keeffe v. Dugan

Mary C. O’Keeffe, Appellant, v. J. Fred Dugan, as Acting Town Clerk of the Town of Riverhead, Et Al., Respondents. Robert P. Griffing Et Al., Intervenors, Respondents

O'Keeffe v. Dugan, 122 N.E. 887 (N.Y. 1919)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 21, 1919
Citations
122 N.E. 887225 N.Y. 6671919 N.Y. LEXIS 1197
Summary
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered November 6, 1918, which reversed an order of Special Term granting an injunction restraining the acting town clerk of the town of Riverhead from submitting to the electors at the town meeting to be held November 5, 1918, the question of local option. The following questions were certified: First Was the petition herein duly acknowledged by the electors subscribing the same as required by section 13 of the Liquor Tax Law in a form sufficient to give jurisdiction to the town meeting to vote on the local option questions authorized by said section? Second. Is the proof by subscribing witnesses of the signatures of electors subscribing the petition herein a sufficient compliance with the requirements of section 13 of the Liquor Tax Law respecting the signing and acknowledgment by electors of petitions for the submission of the questions herein provided? Third. Does section 11 of the General Construction Law govern section 13 of the Liquor Tax Law as to the acknowledgment of the petition thereby provided?

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Order affirmed, with costs, and questions certified answered in the affirmative; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ. Not voting: Hogan, J.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1921: 11926: 11929: 11940: 11941: 11956: 11977: 11995: 12009: 119212026peak 1921 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Maul v. Maul262 A.D. 941 (1941)
  2. Chester v. Hall204 P. 237 (Cal. Ct. App. 1921)
  3. State ex rel. Gran v. Bratsberg210 N.W. 4 (N.D. 1926)
  4. Southbridge Finishing Co. v. Golding2 A.D.2d 430 (1956)
  5. Normandie Oil Corp. v. Oil Trading Co.147 S.W.2d 557 (Tex. App. 1940)
  6. Brustein v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.135 Misc. 352 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1929)

Most recent

  1. Mandel v. Board of Assessors60 A.D.3d 1063 (2009)
  2. Cotroneo v. Monroe County Board of Elections166 Misc. 2d 63 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1995)
  3. Opn. No.(N.Y. Att'y Gen. June 14, 1977)
  4. Southbridge Finishing Co. v. Golding2 A.D.2d 430 (1956)
  5. Maul v. Maul262 A.D. 941 (1941)
  6. Normandie Oil Corp. v. Oil Trading Co.147 S.W.2d 557 (Tex. App. 1940)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list