Legal Opinion
Rein v. Wagner
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 3, 1965PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSamuel H. Hofstadter, J.
I am bound in duty and in respect, to honor the controlling rulings of Matter of Stich v. Wagner (36 Misc 2d 51, affd. 18 A D 2d 454, affd. 14 N Y 2d 530). Hence, I am constrained to reject as legally inadmissible petitioners’ contention that since their rights are derived from State statute, they cannot be limited or impaired by local limitation — that 93c-2.0 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York cannot be applied to any of them under any circumstances. I embrace cordially their view, however, that morally it would be egregiously inequitable to differentiate among them…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- George Moore Ice Cream Co. v. RoseSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Gillet v. . Bank of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Braniff Airways, Inc. v. Nebraska State Board of Equalization & AssessmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- People v. Westchester County National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1921
- Hudson v. Yonkers Fruit Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1932
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- S. Leo Harmonay, Inc. v. Binks Manufacturing Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1984
- Stahl Management Corp. v. Conceptions UnlimitedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1983
- Clarke v. TRIGO U.S.District Court, S.D. New York · 2023
- Trustees of the Local 7 Tile Industry Welfare Fund, Trustees of the Local 7 Tile Industry Annuity Fund, Trustees of the Tile Layers Local Union 52 Pension Fund v. Gibraltar Contracting, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2021