fine analysis in New York

1960It is not to be determined “by the fine analysis or by argument and dissection of an expert, but by ordinary observation” (Wiren v. Shubert Theatre Corp., 5 F. Supp. 358, 362 , affd. 70 F. 2d 1023 , cert, denied 293 U. S. 591 ).

1948It is not to be determined by the fine analysis or by argument and dissection of an expert, but by ordinary observations ” (Wiren v. Shubert Theatre Corp., 5 F. Supp. 358, 362 , affd. 70 F. 2d, 1023 , certiorari denied, 293 U. S. 591 , supra).

1960It is not to be determined “by the fine analysis or by argument and dissection of an expert, but by ordinary observation” (Wiren v. Shubert Theatre Corp., 5 F. Supp. 358, 362 , affd. 70 F. 2d 1023 , cert, denied 293 U. S. 591 ).

1948It is not to be determined by the fine analysis or by argument and dissection of an expert, but by ordinary observations ” (Wiren v. Shubert Theatre Corp., 5 F. Supp. 358, 362 , affd. 70 F. 2d, 1023 , certiorari denied, 293 U. S. 591 , supra).

1981Clearly, retroactive judicial expansion of the narrow and precise statutory language at issue should be avoided under these circumstances (State of New York v Mobil Oil Corp., 38 NY2d 460 ), and, therefore, neither the oral directive of the PSC employee nor the published rule of the PSC providing that a formal order is not always necessary in a billing dispute (16 NYCRR 11.2 [d]) is sufficient to constitute an order of the PSC the violation of which would subject defendant to a fine under section 89-k.

1975(People v Star Supermarkets, 67 Misc 2d 483 , affd 40 AD2d 946 .) The applicable provision of section 55.10 of the Penal Law is to the effect that, notwithstanding any other ' designation specified in the law defining it, an offense for which the only sentence is a fine is a violation (subd 3, par [a]).

1975(People v Star Supermarkets, 67 Misc 2d 483 , affd 40 AD2d 946 .) The applicable provision of section 55.10 of the Penal Law is to the effect that, notwithstanding any other ' designation specified in the law defining it, an offense for which the only sentence is a fine is a violation (subd 3, par [a]).

1960It is not to be determined “by the fine analysis or by argument and dissection of an expert, but by ordinary observation” (Wiren v. Shubert Theatre Corp., 5 F. Supp. 358, 362 , affd. 70 F. 2d 1023 , cert, denied 293 U. S. 591 ).

1948And, as said in Hewitt v. Coward, 180 Misc. 1065, 1066 , affd. 266 App. Div. 992 ), “ The similarity must be one that would be apparent upon ordinary observation ”.

1948It is not to be determined by the fine analysis or by argument and dissection of an expert, but by ordinary observations ” (Wiren v. Shubert Theatre Corp., 5 F. Supp. 358, 362 , affd. 70 F. 2d, 1023 , certiorari denied, 293 U. S. 591 , supra).

1948And, as said in Hewitt v. Coward, 180 Misc. 1065, 1066 , affd. 266 App. Div. 992 ), “ The similarity must be one that would be apparent upon ordinary observation ”.

1942Cotte v. Gilbert, 226 N. Y. 103 .) Returning, then, to a consideration of the provisions of the Town Law whereby the Town Board was empowered to enact an ordinance such as that here involved, we find that article 16 of that statute, empowering such board to enact zoning ordinances, limits the fine for the violation thereof to $50 (Town Law, § 268), which is in apparent conflict with section 135 of the Town Law authorizing or empowering the Town Board to fix the amount of fine to be imposed for violation of any of its ordinances.

1930In City of Buffalo v. Preston ([1903] 81 App. Div. 480 ) the city instituted a civil action in the Municipal Court to recover a fine for a violation of certain city ordinances making persons keeping houses of ill fame guilty of disorderly conduct.