International Mutoscope Reel Co. v. Valentine
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the CourtGlennon, J.
This action was instituted by plaintiffs-respondents, some of whom are manufacturers, and others operators and owners of machines ordinarily known as and commonly called “ crane,” “ claw ” and “ digger ” type, against the police commissioner of the city of New York for a declaratory judgment and injunction. In their prayer for relief plaintiffs asked the court (a) to determine that the machines manufactured, distributed, licensed and operated by the plaintiffs-respondents are not violative of sections 982, 977 and 1376 of the Penal Law, and (b) that the defendant police commissioner be…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- James v. Alderton Dock Yards, Ltd.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Delaney v. . FloodNew York Court of Appeals · 1906
- Brownell v. Board of Education of Inside Tax District of City of Saratoga SpringsNew York Court of Appeals · 1925
- Braman v. BabcockSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
- Westchester Mortgage Co. v. Grand Rapids & Ionia RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Liberty Mutual Insurance v. JonesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1939
- Pepple v. HeadrickIdaho Supreme Court · 1942
- Boies v. BartellArizona Supreme Court · 1957
- People v. WhitcombAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1948
- Amusement Enterprises, Inc. v. FieldingNew York Supreme Court · 1946
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.