Biddles, Inc. v. Enright

208 A.D. 790
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 15, 1924·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Judgment and orders unanimously affirmed, with ebsts. Considering the history of the legislation upon the question involved, the reasons advanced as justifying the law preventing theft and protecting the public from fraud, and in view of other similar legislation now upon the statute books and the decisions of our courts upon this and kindred subjects, we are of opinion that the acts in question tend to protect the safety and welfare of the community, and are within the rule laid down, by the Court of Appeals in Ives v. South Buffalo R. Co. (201 N. Y. 301). Present — Kelly, P. J., Rich, Jaycox, Kelby and Young, JJ.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Biddles, Inc. v. Enright, 208 A.D. 790 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1924).

208 A.D. 790 (Biddles, Inc. v. Enright) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re West
243 P. 55 (California Court of Appeal, 1925)
Holsman v. Thomas
147 N.E. 750 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1925)
Carlton v. City of Watertown
124 Misc. 244 (New York Supreme Court, 1924)
Alexander v. Enright
211 A.D. 146 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1924)