Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
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)
Judges

CHARLES A. VAN IDERSTINE, Plaintiff, v. THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant.

NEWBURGER, J.

It is apparent from the reading of sections 1205 and 1206 of the charter that the board of health is vested with discretion in the awarding of contracts for the removal of refuse, which is not controlled by the provisions of section 419; and, as was said by Mr. Justice Leventritt in the case of Pocher v. Board of Health, found in the Law Journal of March 7, 1905, these sections are not merely emergency sections, but they are most general in their terms, and if in conflict with section 419 would have to be given controlling force, if for no other reason than that by their position in the charter they are to be taken as later enactments. As Mr. Justice Leventritt further says, the power vested being discretionary, the court has no right to interfere except under exceptional circumstances. There is no evidence before me in this proceeding that would warrant this court in holding that there was any fraud or deception; therefore the motion is denied.

Motion denied.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

VAN IDERSTINE v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
(Jan 1, 1910)