Legal Opinion
Burnham v. Hornaday
New York Supreme Court
Decided August 16, 1927PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHeefernan, J.
This is an action for libel. The pleadings disclose that plaintiff and defendant are interested in the subject of game conservation in the United States. As to what degree of conservation is desirable, what methods should be employed — in particular what limits should be imposed by Federal regulation upon game bags and the length of the open seasons — they differ radically.
By the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of July 3,1918 (40 U. S. Stat. at Large, chap. 128), the Department • of Agriculture was given authority to enforce the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty relating to the protection of…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- United States v. BirdsallSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Hamilton v. . EnoNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- O'Connell v. . Press Publishing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1915
- Morrison v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1904
- Bingham v. . GaynorNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- O'Regan v. SchermerhornSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1946
- Cohalan v. New York World-Telegram Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1939
- Callahan v. Josef Israels II, & Doubleday, Doran & Co.New York Supreme Court · 1931