Legal Opinion

Lowe v. Sheldon

New York Court of Appeals

Decided November 16, 1937PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

We are in agreement with the Appellate Division in the conclusion which it reached. We are of the opinion, however, that the amendment of section 139 of the Tax Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 60), under the facts of this case, effected a mere change of procedure and was, therefore, constitutional even between private parties. (Cf. Curtis v. Whitney, 80 U. S. 68; Conley v. Barton, 260 U. S. 677.)

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughran, Finch and Rippey, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, etc.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Curtis v. WhitneySupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  2. Conley v. BartonSupreme Court of the United States · 1923

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Lyford v. State of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
  2. In re KesslerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1938
  3. Gillespie v. Board of SupervisorsNew York Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Nelson v. FantinoNew York Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Barzler v. FischerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1947

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API