People v. Rotter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rotter

255 A.D. 803, 7 N.Y.S.2d 270, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5388

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 21, 1938

StatusPublished

This text of 255 A.D. 803 (People v. Rotter) 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 v. Rotter, 255 A.D. 803, 7 N.Y.S.2d 270, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5388 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment of conviction rendered in the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Borough of Queens, convicting appellant of a violation of section 188 of the Agriculture and Markets Law reversed on the law, information [804]*804dismissed and fine remitted. Section 188 of the Agriculture and Markets Law contemplates a delivery of merchandise which is less in quantity than that represented, although such delivery may be conditioned upon payment. (People v. Kaminsky, 245 App. Div. 768; People v. Abruzzese, 254 id. 709; affd., 278 N. Y. 411; People v. Berman, Id. 408.) The proof in the case at bar shows not only that no delivery was made but that no sale had been consummated. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Judgment of conviction rendered in the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Borough of Queens, convicting appellant of a violation of section 188 of the Agriculture and Markets Law reversed on the law, information [804]*804dismissed and fine remitted. Section 188 of the Agriculture and Markets Law contemplates a delivery of merchandise which is less in quantity than that represented, although such delivery may be conditioned upon payment. (People v. Kaminsky, 245 App. Div. 768; People v. Abruzzese, 254 id. 709; affd., 278 N. Y. 411; People v. Berman, Id. 408.) The proof in the case at bar shows not only that no delivery was made but that no sale had been consummated. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D. 803, 7 N.Y.S.2d 270, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5388, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rotter-nyappdiv-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack