From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

BOWE v. McNAB

Supreme Court, Albany Trial Term
Jun 1, 1896
17 Misc. 414 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1896)

Opinion

June, 1896.

Mark Cohn, for plaintiff.

Rieck Wachsman, for defendants.


The jurisdiction of the assessors to make the assessment in question depended upon the existence of two facts: the residence of the defendants in the ward when the assessment was made, and their possession or control, as executors, of personal property of their testator. The concurrence of these facts was essential to make them "taxable inhabitants." 1 R.S. 389, § 5, Laws of 1850, chap. 86, § 53. The latter of these jurisdictional facts did not exist. Since the death of the testator the legal title to the property has been vested in a trustee, residing in Kings county, who has had possession and control. I am of opinion, therefore, that the assessment is void, and the defendants are entitled to judgment, with costs.

Ordered accordingly.


Summaries of

BOWE v. McNAB

Supreme Court, Albany Trial Term
Jun 1, 1896
17 Misc. 414 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1896)
Case details for

BOWE v. McNAB

Case Details

Full title:JOHN BOWE, as Treasurer of Albany County, Plaintiff, v . PETER D. McNAB et…

Court:Supreme Court, Albany Trial Term

Date published: Jun 1, 1896

Citations

17 Misc. 414 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1896)
40 N.Y.S. 1112

Citing Cases

In re Salem

The term “for use” is afforded a “broad interpretation,” and the “sought-after evidence need not be…

In re Refinería de Cartagena S.A.S.

The term “for use” is afforded a “broad interpretation,” and the “sought-after evidence need not be…