MATTER OF BARSKY v. Bd. of Regents
New York Court of Appeals
1DissentFuld, J.
It is “ the public policy of this State that we do not, if we can avoid it, decree forfeitures in our courts because of violations of the criminal laws of another jurisdic*100tian.” (People ex rel. Marks v. Brophy, 293 N. Y. 469, 474.) That public policy is grounded in a natural and humane abhorrence of heaping added domestic penalties upon one convicted of a crime in a foreign jurisdiction. I cannot, therefore, agree with the court’s conclusion that the license of a physician may be suspended or revoked by the Regents — pursuant to paragraph (b) of subdivision 2 of section 6514 of the Education…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. McGrathSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Niemotko v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Ng Fung Ho v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Sinclair v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Matter of RoussNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.