People v. McDowell

28 N.Y.S. 1130, 82 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 613, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 890
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 18, 1894
StatusPublished

This text of 28 N.Y.S. 1130 (People v. McDowell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. McDowell, 28 N.Y.S. 1130, 82 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 613, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 890 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1894).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

It is true that the new trial in this case was granted the law; but we cannot certify that upon the facts we would affirm the conviction, for the reason that we think the evidence establishes, or that the jury might have found as facts, that the board of excise granted the defendant a license, that the commissioners of excise, composing the board, were one a de jure and the other a de facto officer, and that the defendant applied to such board for a license in good faith, believing the persons composing it to be de jure officers. See 23 N. Y. Supp. 950.

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

Related

People v. McDowell
23 N.Y.S. 950 (New York Supreme Court, 1893)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
28 N.Y.S. 1130, 82 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 613, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 890, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mcdowell-nysupct-1894.