Case ID: ny_62/html/0504-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Rapallo, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In the Matter of the Petition of Patrick F. Conway to Vacate an Assessment.
    (Argued June 22,1875;
    decided September 21, 1875.)
    Under the New York charter of 1870 (chap. 137, Laws of 1870), it was unnecessary to publish resolutions and ordinances authorizing public improvements in all the newspapers employed by the corporation; a publication in one of them was sufficient.
    
      In re Oonway (4 Him, 43) modified.
    Appeal from order of General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, reversing an order of Special Term vacating an assessment for repaving Thirty-second street, between Second avenue and East river, in the city of New York. (Reported below, 4 Hun, 43.)
    The resolution and ordinance providing for the work were introduced in the board of aldermen March 18, 1870; reported from committee May 12, 1870; adopted May twentieth; transmitted to and introduced in the board of assistant aldermen May twenty-first, and adopted May twenty-fourth. Evidence was given that no notice of the proceedings was published in the “ Leader,” a corporation paper.
    
      James A. Deering for the appellant.
    The resolution and ordinance not having been published in all the newspapers designated, as required by sections 7 and 37 of the charter of 1857, were void. (In re Douglas, 46 N. Y., 42; In re Smith, 52 id., 526; In re Astor, 50 id., 363; In re Folsom, 56 id., 60; In re Phillips, Ct. App., Feb., 1875; Laws 1870, chap. 37.)
    
      William Barnes for the respondents.
   Rapallo, J.

Under the charter of 1870 (Laws of 1870, chap. 137) it was not necessary to publish the ordinance and resolution in all the corporation papers; a publication in any of them was sufficient.

The petitioner failed to show an entire omission to publish. All that was shown was an omission to publish in the “Leader.”

The proofs do not show that it was legally impossible that the publication should have been made three days before the passage of the ordinance and resolution. They were introduced in the board of assistant aldermen on the 21st of May, 1870. If published on the same day, three days must have elapsed on the twenty-fourth of May, and they were not adopted until that day. All that thé charter of 1870 required was that they should not be adopted until after they had been published at least three days.

The order of the General Term should be modified so as to send the ease back for rehearing at Special Term, and as thus modified affirmed.

All concur.

Ordered accordingly.