Legal Opinion
People v. Pfingst
New York City Magistrates' Court
Decided January 13, 1956PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Potter, M.
Defendant Pfingst is charged with operating, and permitting his employees, defendants De Eenzi and Policastro, to operate vehicles as taxicabs for hire, without first having procured the requisite licenses therefor.
De Eenzi and Policastro are severally charged with operating such vehicles and with driving taxicabs without being duly licensed to do so.
The claimed violations of law are founded upon the following provisions of the Administrative Code of the City of New York, namely, clause (a) of paragraph 43-a* of subdivision l of section 436-2.0, as against Pfingst; and clauses (a)…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Jordan v. De GeorgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Frost & Frost Trucking Co. v. Railroad Comm'n of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Smith v. CahoonSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Stephenson v. BinfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- People v. Cassese, New York County Courts1964
- People v. ScifoCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1963
- Doe v. Uber Technologies, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2021