Legal Opinion

Ryan v. Schneider

New York City Court

Decided June 15, 1928PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Simpson, J. (orally).

I have given this matter careful consideration. These three ■ defendants were charged with violating regulation 9-a of the Sanitary Code of the city of New York, and their cases were tried before me. Regulation 9-a of the board of health [enacted pursuant to section 156 of the Sanitary Code] reads as follows: “ Regulation 9-a. Churns, etc.; permit required. No person engaged in the business of the manufacture, sale or treatment of milk or milk products shall install or have or keep a churn or other device or machine for the manufacture or treatment of milk or milk…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. City of Rochester v. MacAuley-fien Milling Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1910
  2. In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of ThornburghNew York Surrogate's Court · 1911
  3. People ex rel. Wogan v. RaffertyNew York Supreme Court · 1912
  4. People ex rel. Standard Bill Posting Co. v. HastingsNew York Supreme Court · 1912
  5. People v. PrayNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1914

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. People v. MoreiraSuffolk County District Court · 1972
  2. People v. A & C Trucking Co.Geneva City Court · 1977
  3. Rauscher v. Village of BoonvilleNew York Supreme Court · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API