Marcus v. Joseph
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Dissent
Cohn and Van Vooehis, JJ.
(dissenting). If the legislative intent as expressed in a statute is clear and unambiguous, the title is not to be considered in its interpretation (People v. Molyneux, 40 N. Y. 113; People v. Willett, 164 App. Div. 1, affd. 213 N. Y. 368). The substance of a plain statute can neither be extended nor restricted by the language of the title (Matter of New York and Brooklyn Bridge, 72 N. Y. 527; McKinney’s Cons. Laws of N. Y., Book 1, Statutes [1942 ed.], §§ 123, 124). The same is true of the legislative history of a statute, which will not be allowed to control the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- In re the Trustees of the New York & Brooklyn BridgeNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- People v. . WillettNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
- People v. . MolyneuxNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
- People Ex Rel. Mitchell v. . SturgesNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
- People v. WillettAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914