Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

CHARLES F. BANDEL, Appellant, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: CULLEN, Ch. J., GRAY, HAIGHT, WERNER and COLLIN, JJ.; HISCOCK, J., concurs on the ground that plaintiff having been licensed to practice osteopathy under the provisions of section 14 of chapter 344 of the Laws of 1907, and not in accordance with the last clause of subdivision 6 of section 7 of said act and related provisions, is not in position to claim that the ordinance in question is arbitrarily and unreasonably discriminating. Concurs: VANN, J.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BANDEL v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK
(Mar 8, 1912)