Jones v. Estis

2 Johns. 380
New York Supreme Court·Decided August 15, 1807·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam

The penalty of five dollars, in the Water Vliet turnpike act, is clearly not imposed. The Cherry Valley act, by establishing the like rates of toll as in the Water Vliet act, did not thereby establish the penalties imposed in the latter act. We are also inclined to think that no penalty was imposed, even by the reference to the Mudsoji turnpikeact, but that the present is a casus omissus. There is nothing said in the Cherry Valley act about penalties, and a penalty cannot be raised by implication, but must be expressly created and imposed.

Judgment reversed,

Footnotes

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

Jones v. Estis, 2 Johns. 380 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1807).

2 Johns. 380 (Jones v. Estis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McComb v. Belknap
30 Abb. N. Cas. 119 (New York Supreme Court, 1892)
State v. Gaunt
9 P. 55 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1885)
Lowenberg v. People
5 Park. Cr. 414 (New York Supreme Court, 1863)