merely rule in New York

1981School Dist. v Pavilion Faculty Assn., 51 AD2d 119 , mots for lv to app dsmd 40 NY2d 845 , 42 NY2d 961 ).

1981School Dist. v Pavilion Faculty Assn., 51 AD2d 119 , mots for lv to app dsmd 40 NY2d 845 , 42 NY2d 961 ).

1972Odell v. Hall ( 204 Misc. 713, 714 ) MoAvoy, J., wrote: “ A preliminary examination is not a trial but merely an inquiry, after a criminal charge has been initiated, to determine whether there is sufficient or probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed and the accused guilty thereof.

1968In a third-party action, the third-party plaintiff need not re-establish against the third-party defendant all of the material facts which have been adjudicated by the judgment in favor of the original plaintiff (Brown v. Hersch Chemists, 281 App. Div. 43 , affd. 305 N. Y. 755 ) but, this is merely a rule of evidenpe, helpful at the trial, not controlling on a motion to dismiss.

1968In a third-party action, the third-party plaintiff need not re-establish against the third-party defendant all of the material facts which have been adjudicated by the judgment in favor of the original plaintiff (Brown v. Hersch Chemists, 281 App. Div. 43 , affd. 305 N. Y. 755 ) but, this is merely a rule of evidenpe, helpful at the trial, not controlling on a motion to dismiss.

1950This is not merely a rule ‘ ‘ for the guidance of the judicial conscience ” (Winston v. Winston, 165 N. Y. 553, 556 , affd. 189 U. S. 506 ), but a statutory rule of evidence.

1950This is not merely a rule ‘ ‘ for the guidance of the judicial conscience ” (Winston v. Winston, 165 N. Y. 553, 556 , affd. 189 U. S. 506 ), but a statutory rule of evidence.

1911The fact that an affidavit upon which a warrant of attachment was issued was sworn to before a notary public, who was the plaintiff’s attorney of record, is a mere irregularity, and no ground for vacating the attachment, and a subsequent judgment, where the facts stated in the affidavit are not controverted.” Defendant relies principally upon the case of McMillan v. Williams, decided by the learned county judge of Monroe county, and reported in the issue of the Rochester Daily Record of August 6, 1910, and affirmed without opinion in 140 App. Div. 940 , 126 N. Y.

1911The fact that an affidavit upon which a warrant of attachment was issued was sworn to before a notary public, who was the plaintiff’s attorney of record, is a mere irregularity, and no ground for vacating the attachment, and a subsequent judgment, where the facts stated in the affidavit are not controverted.” Defendant relies principally upon the case of McMillan v. Williams, decided by the learned county judge of Monroe county, and reported in the issue of the Rochester Daily Record of August 6, 1910, and affirmed without opinion in 140 App. Div. 940 , 126 N. Y.

1899A by-law of a municipal corporation is a local law, enacted by public officers by virtue of legislative powers delegated to' them by the State.” In Matter of Long Island Railroad Co. ( 19 Wend. 37 ) it was held that an incorporated company had not the power to enact a by-law subjecting stock to forfeiture on account of the non-payment of installments due thereon without express legislative authority.

1884The presumption of law is that if any other crime was committed as an incident or part of the "transaction of stealing that property, the person who is found in possession also committed that other crime which was a part of the transaction of taking the property ; but this is merely a presumption, and the legal import and meaning of this is that it casts upon the prisoner in whose possession the goods are found the duty of explaining where and how he obtained the property.” The rule as laid down by the Court of Appeals in Stover v. People, 56 N. Y. 315 , is as follow’s : “ When proof authorizi