Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Village of Flushing v. Carraher

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 13, 1895PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from Queens county court. Action by the village of Flushing against Patrick Carraher to recover the penalty for violating a health ordinance. Judgment was entered in favor of plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtCullen, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the county court in favor of the plaintiff, entered on a verdict directed by the court. This action is to recover $50, as a penalty for violating the following section of the health ordinances enacted by the board of health of the village of Flushing:

“No cows shall be kept within two hundred feet of any dwelling in the village of Flushing without a special permit obtained from the board of health. Any violation of the provisions of this ordinance shall be punished by a fine of fifty dollars.”

There is no.doubt of the fact that the defendant did violate this…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Copcutt v. . Board of HealthNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
  2. Polinsky v. . PeopleNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
  3. Village of New Rochelle v. LangNew York Supreme Court · 1894

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Kent v. Village of North TarrytownAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900
  2. People v. DavisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
  3. Buffalo Fertilizer Co. v. Town of CheektowagaNew York Supreme Court · 1908
  4. People v. DavisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
  5. People Ex Rel. Lieberman v. . VandecarrNew York Court of Appeals · 1903

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API