People v. Ring

254 A.D. 709, 3 N.Y.S.2d 817, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7215
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 22, 1938·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Judgment of the Court of Special Sessions, City of New York, Borough of Brooklyn, convicting defendant of delivery of a deficient quantity of a commodity and a violation of section 188 of the Agriculture and Markets Law, unanimously affirmed. The evidence established a delivery following the misrepresentation as to the weight of the commodity. Section 188 of the Agriculture and Markets Law does not require that the potential customer be in fact actually defrauded. In this respect it differs from section 2411 of the Penal Law. The principle of Peoplev. Visconti (234 N. Y. 165) is controlling, and in so far as People v. Goldberg (146 App. Div. 950) is to the contrary, the latter ease may not be followed. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ.

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

People v. Ring, 254 A.D. 709, 3 N.Y.S.2d 817, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7215 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

254 A.D. 709 (People v. Ring) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Masback Hardware Co.
175 Misc. 177 (New Rochelle City Court, 1940)