Legal Opinion

Hallenbeck v. Hallenbeck

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

Decided July 15, 1933PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order in so far as an appeal has been taken therefrom affirmed, without costs. Without passing on the question of the degree of liability imposed on the city by chapter 186 of the Laws of 1908, we are of opinion that the statute is not retroactive in its effect. (Jacobus v. Colgate, 217 N. Y. 235, 240.) The loss in the funds in the hands of the county treasurer of Kings county occurred before the statute above referred to was enacted. Where a retrospective effect is given to a statute such purpose is ordinarily indicated in the language of the statute itself. (Jackson v. State of New York,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Jacobus v. . ColgateNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. Jackson v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1933

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Banks v. A. Jacoby & Sons, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1936
  2. City of New York v. BuckleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940
  3. Walker v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API