People ex rel. Kieley v. Lent

166 A.D. 550, 33 N.Y. Crim. 90, 152 N.Y.S. 18, 1915 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7300
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 12, 1915
StatusPublished
Cited by25 cases

This text of 166 A.D. 550 (People ex rel. Kieley v. Lent) 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.

Bluebook
People ex rel. Kieley v. Lent, 166 A.D. 550, 33 N.Y. Crim. 90, 152 N.Y.S. 18, 1915 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7300 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

Opinion

Putnam, J.:

The powers of the city of Yonkers, under its municipal charter (Laws of 1908, chap. 452, art. 3, § 1, subd. 21), to regulate amusements and common shows, include a right to license an exhibition of moving pictures. The city ordinance (§ 13), however, prohibits such a show on Sunday, and declares that every person violating this section shall forfeit a penalty of not less than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) nor more than one hundred dollars ($100.00) in the discretion of the magistrate convicting.” The relator has been arrested for violation of this section.

A license may be conditionally granted. It may he given subject to certain reasonable hours of opening and other limits upon its exercise. But the derivative power of a municipality [551]*551to fine and imprison can only exist under, and in the due enforcement of, authority clearly committed to the municipality. The intent that municipal corporations by ordinance can supersede the State law will not be inferred from general grants of power, nor will such authority be held to exist as an implied or incidental right. (Dillon Mun. Corp. [5th ed.] § 632.) As all municipal authority comes from the Legislature, the provisions of municipal charters, however broad, are subject to such restrictions as may be imposed by general laws. (Lechner v. Village of Newark, 19 Misc. Rep. 452, 454.) The additional powers granted by chapter 247 of the Laws of 1913, amending the General City Law (Consol. Laws, chap. 21; Laws of 1909, chap. 26) by adding article 2a to said statute, giving authority to enforce ordinances by affixing penalties, forfeitures and imprisonment (§ 20, subd. 22), did not, and could not, surrender the general power to legislate against criminal offenses, which remains in the Legislature. (People v. Jarvis, 19 App. Div. 466.) The Legislature alone may command Dow Sunday shall be kept. (Neuendorff v. Duryea, 69 N. Y. 557; People v. Dunford, 207 id. 17, 20; People v. Moses, 140 id. 215.) Hence the city of Yonkers cannot independently compel and enforce Sunday closing, by means of fine or imprisonment, unless such prohibition is part of the law and policy as declared by the Legislature.

It follows that the writ should be sustained, and the relator discharged.

Jenks, P. J., Cabe and Rich, JJ., concurred; Bubb, J., concurred in result.

Writ sustained, and relator discharged.

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

Related

Town of Brookhaven v. Suffolk Meadows Quarter Horse Racing Ass'n
76 Misc. 2d 175 (Suffolk County District Court, 1973)
People v. Martins of Hempstead, Inc.
55 Misc. 2d 802 (New York County Courts, 1967)
Sa-Bleu, Inc. v. Village of Port Chester
42 Misc. 2d 360 (New York Supreme Court, 1963)
Schacht v. City of New York
30 Misc. 2d 77 (New York Supreme Court, 1961)
People v. Weinberger
8 Misc. 2d 953 (New York City Magistrates' Court, 1957)
People v. Deen
3 A.D.2d 836 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1957)
People v. Blue Ribbon Ice Cream Co.
1 Misc. 2d 453 (New York Court of Special Session, 1956)
Holy Sepulchre Cemetery v. Town of Greece
191 Misc. 241 (New York Supreme Court, 1947)
People ex rel. Elkind v. Rosenblum
184 Misc. 916 (New York Supreme Court, 1945)
Good Humor Corp. v. City of New York
264 A.D. 620 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1942)
S. H. Kress & Co. v. Department of Health
27 N.E.2d 431 (New York Court of Appeals, 1940)
People v. County of Westchester
26 N.E.2d 27 (New York Court of Appeals, 1940)
People v. County of Westchester
257 A.D. 769 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1939)
Village of Fleischmanns v. Hyman
164 Misc. 175 (New York Supreme Court, 1937)
Hitchcock v. Foote
140 Misc. 401 (New York Supreme Court, 1930)
Jewish Consumptives' Relief Society v. Town of Woodbury
230 A.D. 228 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1930)
Carvallo v. Cooper
228 A.D. 719 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1930)
Schieffelin v. Dolan
204 A.D. 351 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1923)
Power v. Nordstrom
184 N.W. 967 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1921)
People ex rel. Economus v. Coakley
110 Misc. 385 (New York Supreme Court, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
166 A.D. 550, 33 N.Y. Crim. 90, 152 N.Y.S. 18, 1915 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-kieley-v-lent-nyappdiv-1915.