
    People ex rel. Ryan v. Bleckwenn, Treasurer.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.
    
    February 18, 1890.)
    Public Improvements—Certibtoates—Redemption.
    Under Laws N. Y. 1874, c. 336, which provides that improvement certificates issued thereunder shall at all times be receivable in payment of assessments for improvements made under the act, and that all moneys received in payment of assessments and on sales for non-payment shall be applied to the satisfaction of such certificates, the latter are receivable on redemption, by the owner of property, from a sale for non-payment of the assessments, to the amount due at the time of sale.
    Appeal from special term, Kings county.
    Petition by James Ryan for mandamus, to compel Frederick W. Bleckwenn, treasurer of Long Island City, to receive certain improvement certificates is■sued under Laws K". Y. 1874, c. 326, in payment on redemption by petitioner from a sale of his property for non-payment of assessments for improvements made under the act. The petition was granted. The following was the opinion delivered at special term:
    “Cullen, J. While the mode of sale was governed by the act of 1886, the ■disposition of the funds arising upon the sale is prescribed by the original act of 1874, which provided for the improvement for which the assessment has been laid. By that act the moneys produced, either by the payment of the assessments or by the sale for an unpaid assessment, do not pass into the general treasury of the city, but are held as a separate and distinct fund, to be applied only to the satisfaction of the improvement certificates. By section 9 of the act it is provided that those certificates shall ‘ at all times ’ be receivable at par and interest in payment of the assessments. The language of the statute is very broad: * Shall be receivable at all times ’ in payment of the assessments. I do not think the certificate on the sale is a substantially different thing from the assessment. The owner has a right to redeem within a given time, and until the expiration of the time for redemption is not divested of his property. The redemption is substantially a payment of the assessment, with the expenses of the sale and interest. I think, therefore, a payment in improvement certificates good; and no harm or loss can occur to the city if enough is paid in cash to defray the expenses of the sale, and the interest payable to the purchaser. This the petitioner is willing to do. To the extent of the amount due on the assessment for principal and interest accrued at the time of sale, the redemption, in my opinion, can be made in the certificates. Motion granted.”
    Defendant appeals.
    Argued before Barnard, P. J., and Dykman and Pratt, JJ.
    
      W. J. Foster, for appellant. John H. Kemble, for respondent.
   Dykman, J.

The order appealed from should be affirmed on the opinion of the court below, with $10 costs and disbursements. All concur.  