Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 New York opinions name it 3 courts 1880–1907 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Whipple v. . Christian
neutral
2 sentences1907The case of Whipple v. Christian, 80 N. Y. 523—526, holds it to be a well settled rule that “A special act will not be deemed repealed by implication in consequence of the passage of a general law, containing a general repealing clause of inconsistent legislation.” That telegraph companies in this State enjoy the protection of special statutes and enjoy special rights, powers and privileges, is demonstrated in Benedict v. Western Union Telegraph Company, 9 Abb. 1894Whipple v. Christian, 80 N. Y. 523 ; Aldinger v. Pugh, 32 N. Y. | 3 | 1890–1907 |
Village of Gloversville v. . Howell
neutral
2 sentences1897Canal Co., 69 N. Y. 209 , and Village of Gloversville v. Howell, 70 N. Y. 287 . 1880(In re The Evergreens, 47 N. Y., 216 ; Bowen v. Lease, 5 Hill, 225 ; Vil. of Gloversville v. Howell, 70 N. Y., 287 ; In re D. and H. | 2 | 1880–1897 |
In the Matter of the Evergreens
green
2 sentences1897The court said: “Neither the act of 1854 nor that of 1858 • referred in terms to the act of 1844, and neither can be so construed as to impair the force of its provisions, unless we depart from the well-settled rule that a special act will not be deemed repealed by implication in consequence of the passage of a general law, containing a general repealing clause of inconsistent legislation.” The same rule is declared in Re Evergreens, 47 N. Y. 216 , Re Delaware & H. 1880(In re The Evergreens, 47 N. Y., 216 ; Bowen v. Lease, 5 Hill, 225 ; Vil. of Gloversville v. Howell, 70 N. Y., 287 ; In re D. and H. | 2 | 1880–1897 |
Benedict v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
neutral
2 sentences1907N. C. 214 , and in Hatch v. American Union Telegraph Company, 9 id. 223 . 1907The case of Whipple v. Christian, 80 N. Y. 523—526, holds it to be a well settled rule that “A special act will not be deemed repealed by implication in consequence of the passage of a general law, containing a general repealing clause of inconsistent legislation.” That telegraph companies in this State enjoy the protection of special statutes and enjoy special rights, powers and privileges, is demonstrated in Benedict v. Western Union Telegraph Company, 9 Abb. | 1 | 1907–1907 |
In Re the President, Managers & Company of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.
green
1 sentence1897Canal Co., 69 N. Y. 209 , and Village of Gloversville v. Howell, 70 N. Y. 287 . | 1 | 1897–1897 |
Aldinger v. Pugh
neutral
1 sentence1889Id. | 1 | 1889–1889 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.