TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

One Hundred & Forty-Ninth Street Realty Co. v. Prendergast

In the Matter of the Application of One Hundred and Forty-Ninth Street Realty Company, Respondent and Appellant, for a Peremptory Writ of Mandamus Against William A. Prendergast, as Comptroller of the City of New York, Appellant and Respondent

One Hundred & Forty-Ninth St. Realty Co. v. Prendergast, 119 N.E. 1063 (N.Y. 1918)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 29, 1918
Citations
119 N.E. 1063222 N.Y. 6541918 N.Y. LEXIS 1540
Summary
Cross-appeals from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered November 15, 1917, which modified and affirmed as modified an order of Special Term granting a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus tó compel the comptroller of the city of New York to pay to the relator the amount of a change of grade award, together with interest at the rate of six per centum per annum from December 30, 1904, to the time of the payment of the award. The comptroller contended that no interest was payable. The Appellate Division modified the order so as to provide for the issuance of the writ requiring the comptroller to pay the award, with interest from November 10, 1906, instead of from December 30, 1904.

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; no opinion.

Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Collin, Cuddeback, Hogan, Cardozo, Pound and Andrews, JJ.

How later courts describe this case

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

1921: 11970: 119212026peak 1921 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Crane v. Craig130 N.E. 609 (N.Y. 1921)
  2. Williams v. State65 Misc. 2d 489 (1970)

Most recent

  1. Williams v. State65 Misc. 2d 489 (1970)
  2. Crane v. Craig130 N.E. 609 (N.Y. 1921)

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