Case ID: nys_111/html/0008-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re DROEGE.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    June 12, 1908.)
    Judges—Removal—Proceedings.
    On an application for the removal from office of the city magistrate, helé, that respondent might present oral testimony as to the transactions upon which the charges were based, although the facts alleged in the petition were in the main admitted by his answer.
    Application for the removal from office of Otto H. Droege, a city magistrate.' Order fixing time for proceedings.
    Argued before INGRAHAM, McLAUGHLIN, HOUGHTON, CLARKE, and SCOTT, JJ.
    Wallace MacFarlane, for petitioner.
    John B. Stanchfield and Howard Cans, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

Although the facts alleged in the petition are .in the main admitted by the answer of the respondent, the court will award to the respondent the right to present such oral testimony as he shall be advised in relation to the transactions upon which these charges are based, and for that purpose have fixed Tuesday, June 23, 1908, at 10 o’clock, at the courthouse of this court, for that purpose, when such testimony as the respondent shall offer in relation to the charges will be heard.