Case Name: In the matter of Albert H. Hook
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1869-11-01
Citations: 55 Barb. 257
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the matter of Albert H. Hook.
Judges: 
Reporter: Barbour's Supreme Court Reports
Volume: 55
Pages: 257–258

Head Matter:
In the matter of Albert H. Hook.
The Supreme Court will not review, on certiorari, proceedings taken against an individual as a disorderly person, under the act of April 17,1860, “ in relation to police and courts in the city of New York,” {Laws of 1860, p. 1007,) for threatening to abandon, and abandoning his wife.
Section 4 of that act provides that any appeal from, or amendment to, an order , made by a magistrate, in such proceedings, shall “ be exclusively for the action of the court of special sessions.” And if that court refuses to entertain jurisdiction, in such a case, it may be compelled by mandamus to do so.
CERTIORARI to reverse proceedings taken under the act of April 17, 1860, “ in relation to police and courts in the city of Hew York.” (Laws of 1860, p. 1007.) The relator was brought before a police justice as a disorderly person, on the ground that he had threatened to abandon his wife, Johanna, and had actually abandoned her. He was arrested on this charge, and brought before the magistrate, by whom he was examined. He denied the charge contained in the affidavit of his wife. He was convicted as prescribed by the statute; and he was ordered to pay twenty dollars weekly to the commissioners of public charities and correction of the city of Hew York. The proceedings and the trial were in conformity with the statute, except that the wife was not examined at the trial.
[New York General Term,
November 1, 1869.

Opinion:
Cardozo, J.
The statute of 1860 (Sess. Laws of 1860, chap. 508, p. 1007) provides that "any appeal from or amendment to" an order like that before us, shall be "exclusively" to the court of special sessions. (§4.) I think, therefore, that we should not review the proceedings. It is no answer to say that the court of sessions will not, for it may be compelled to do so by mandamus; and as no period is limited for an appeal, the relator can bring the matter before the court, to which the statute gives " exclusive " jurisdiction, at any time. He is not, therefore, with.out remedy.
I think the writ should be dismissed.
Sutherland, J., concurred.