Higgins v. Valentine
This text of 256 A.D. 673 (Higgins v. Valentine) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
The evidence fully justified the commissioner in finding the petitioner guilty of signing the name of one Graham to an application for a New York city license as stationary engineer and falsely testifying before the commissioner of accounts that he did not know Raymond D. Malarkey or Brian R. O’Reilly. The petitioner’s acquittal on charges contained in the first, second, fourth and sixth specifications does not necessarily imply that he was not guilty of these. It only decides that, as to these, his guilt was not established to the satisfaction of the commissioner.
The determination should be confirmed, with fifty dollars costs and disbursements to the respondent.
[674]*674Present — Martin, P. J., Untermyer, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.; Dore, J., dissents.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
256 A.D. 673, 11 N.Y.S.2d 395, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4813, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/higgins-v-valentine-nyappdiv-1939.