Case Name: In the Matter of Frank Costello, Appellant. Cornelius O'Leary, as Deputy Police Commissioner of the City of New York, Respondent. In the Matter of Cornelius O'Leary, as 4th Deputy Police Commissioner of the City of New York, Respondent. Frank Costello, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1944-10-20
Citations: 268 A.D. 223
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Frank Costello, Appellant. Cornelius O'Leary, as Deputy Police Commissioner of the City of New York, Respondent. In the Matter of Cornelius O'Leary, as 4th Deputy Police Commissioner of the City of New York, Respondent. Frank Costello, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 268
Pages: 223–224

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Frank Costello, Appellant. Cornelius O'Leary, as Deputy Police Commissioner of the City of New York, Respondent. In the Matter of Cornelius O'Leary, as 4th Deputy Police Commissioner of the City of New York, Respondent. Frank Costello, Appellant.
First Department,
October 20, 1944.
George Wolf of counsel (I. Maurice Wormser, with him on the brief), for appellant.
Morris Shapiro of counsel (W. Bernard Richland with him on the brief; Ignatius M. Wilkinson, Corporation Counsel),for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The first order appealed from denied appellant's motion to vacate a subpoena requiring his appearance at a hearing in proceedings pending before a Deputy Police Commissioner on an application to revoke a cabaret license. The second order appealed from held the appellant guilty of contempt in failing to take the stand and be sworn in the above-mentioned proceeding pursuant to the subpoena, permitting him, however, to purge himself by appearing and testifying at the hearings but otherwise adjudging that on his failure to appear a warrant may issue committing him to jail.
After the argument of the appeals, the Corporation Counsel informed the court that the pending proceedings before the Police Commissioner had been terminated. Accordingly the subject matter of the controversy has ceased to exist, the issues have become academic, and the appeals should be dismissed. (Delevan v. N. Y., N. H. & H. R. R. Co., 216 N. Y. 359.) Relief may be had by application to Special Term to vacate, the orders in view of the termination of the proceedings in which they were issued.
The appeals should be dismissed, without prejudice to an application to Special Term to vacate the orders appealed from; meanwhile the stay granted on September 26,1944, is continued subject to the further order of this court.
Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ., concur.
Appeals unanimously dismissed, without prejudice to an application to Special Term to vacate the orders appealed from. Stay contained in order to show cause dated September 26, 1944, continued subject to the further order of this court.