Legal Opinion

Matter of Mandell v. Board of Regents

New York Court of Appeals

Decided December 31, 1928PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLehman, J.

In June, 1925, the petitioner procured a license to practice pharmacy as a “ junior pharmacist.” He presented satisfactory proof of his qualifications for that license. Before he could obtain a license to practice as a “ pharmacist,” satisfactory proof of additional qualifications was required. (Public Health Law, section 233, now Education Law [Cons. Laws, ch. 16], section 1353.) In order to obtain that license the defendant sought to manufacture evidence of qualifications he did not in fact possess. Upon proof of the attempted fraud, and after notice to the defendant and a hearing before…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hawker v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  2. United States v. EatonSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  3. New York Ex Rel. Lieberman v. Van De CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
  4. Meffert v. State Board of Medical Registration & ExaminationSupreme Court of Kansas · 1903
  5. Hewitt v. Board of Medical ExaminersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Hecht v. MonaghanNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
  2. Levine v. WhalenNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
  3. Matter of Elite Dairy Products v. Ten EyckNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
  4. Prichard v. BattleSupreme Court of Virginia · 1941
  5. Bell v. Board of Regents of the UniversityNew York Court of Appeals · 1945

29 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