People v. Salisbury
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the plaintiff, The People of the State of New York, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Herkimer on the 13tli day of December, 1894, upon the verdict of a jury -rendered after a trial at the- Herkimer Circuit, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 10th day of December, 1894, denying the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the plaintiff, The People of the State of New York, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Herkimer on the 13tli day of December, 1894, upon the verdict of a jury -rendered after a trial at the- Herkimer Circuit, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 10th day of December, 1894, denying the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes. The action was brought to recover a penalty under chapter 338 of the Laws of 1893, as .prescribed in section 37 of that statute, which…
1Opinion of the Court
Hardin, P. J.:
Plaintiff’s complaint alleges that, on the 12th day of July, 1894, the defendant “ sujoplied and brought to' be manufactured to a cheese factory conducted by Henry Davis, situated and located in the town of Litchfield, Herkimer county, N. Y., adulterated milk, milk containing more than eighty-eight per centum of water or *40fluids contrary to and in violation of ” chapter 338 of the Laws of 1893. 'The complaint contained several counts and demanded judgment against the defendant for a penalty of $100. ■ Plaintiff relies upon subdivisions 1, 2 and 3 of section 20 of the act, which…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People v. HodnettNew York Supreme Court · 1893
3Cited by1 opinion
- People v. . BowenNew York Court of Appeals · 1905