Legal Opinion

In re Cranford Material Corp.

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 29, 1940PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMacCrate, J.

Motion denied. The denial, however, is not predicated on any assumed common-law power in the Attorney-General to issue subpoenas for and to attend grand jury sessions. *155The motion serves to point the distinction between the powers of a grand jury convened under an executive order pursuant to section 62 of the Executive Law and the powers of the Attorney-General. By the Constitution it is declared there can be no suspension of the powers of a grand jury to inquire into willful misconduct of public officials (State Const, art. I, § 6). The motion is indicative of future attack on any indictment…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Brinckerhoff v. . BostwickNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
  2. Warner v. People ex rel. ConnerNew York Supreme Court · 1845
  3. People v. KramerNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1900
  4. People Ex Rel. Wogan v. . RaffertyNew York Court of Appeals · 1913

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. People v. Dorsey, New York County Courts1941
  2. Hancock v. SchroeringCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1972
  3. People v. HopkinsNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1944
  4. Haggerty v. HimeleinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
  5. People v. "John Doe", New York County Courts1941

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

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

Powered by the Exa API