Case Name: The People ex rel. Rosalie A. Oakley, Resp't, v. Frederick W. Bleckwenn, Treasurer, etc., App'lt
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1891-02-09
Citations: 35 N.Y. St. Rep. 646
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People ex rel. Rosalie A. Oakley, Resp’t, v. Frederick W. Bleckwenn, Treasurer, etc., App’lt.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 35
Pages: 646–647

Head Matter:
The People ex rel. Rosalie A. Oakley, Resp’t, v. Frederick W. Bleckwenn, Treasurer, etc., App’lt.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department,
Filed February 9, 1891.)
Municipal cobpoeations—Assessments—Impboyement cebtbbtcates— Laws 1874, chap. 326.
Redemption from a sale for assessments under chap. 326, Laws of 1874, may be made in improvement certificates issued under that act to the amount of the assessment and interest.
{People ex rel. Byan v. Bleckwenn, 29 ÍT. Y. State Rep., 826, followed.)
Appeal from order granting motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus.'
The relator is one of the owners, as tenant in common, of certain real property in Long Island City.
In 1888 the premises were sold for an assessment laid under chap. 326, Laws of 1874, to one of the other tenants in common. Within the time allowed for redemption the relator tendered to the treasurer of the city improvement bonds issued under said act to the amount of the sum for which the sale was made, and also cash to the amount of the interest thereon and the expenses of sale,, in redemption 'of said premises, but the treasurer refused to accept the certificates or anything but cash.
W. J. Foster (George W. Stevens, of counsel), for app’lt; Hatch. & Warren (Evarts, Choate & Beaman, of counsel), for resp’t.

Opinion:
Barnard, P. J.
The legislature, by chapter 326, Laws of 1874, authorized certain improvements in Long Island City, a part of the scheme of the act was that the work should be paid for by improvement certificates. This act was amended by chapter 501, of Laws of 1879. These certificates were made receivable by the city in payment of the assessments against the property liable thereto. These certificates were also to be received at the sales of the land made for the assessments. By chapter 656, Laws of 1886, a certificate was to be given to the purchaser of land for an assessment, and redemption was to be made by paying the treasurer for the use of the purchaser the sum mentioned in this certificate given upon the sale, with interest. The land in this case was sold and a certificate given to the purchaser, J. Lyon Gardner. The purchaser paid the assessment in the improvement certificates. The owners of the land tender improvement certificates in redemption of the land. Such certificates were refused by the city treasurer. The question, therefore, is whether improvement certificates must be taken for the " use of the purchaser." The question has been decided by this court in the case of The People ex rel. Ryan v. Bleckwenn, treasurer, 29 N. T. State Rep., 826.
The court was not unanimous, but we are constrained to follow the decision in the Byan case as controlling upon the present one.
The order should, therefore, be affirmed, with costs.
Dykman and Pratt, JJ., concur.