Opinion

Schieffelin v. Komfort

  • 163 A.D. 741
  • 149 N.Y.S. 65
  • 1914 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7655
Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Filed
Aug 27, 1914
Status
Published
Author
Hotchkiss
On the bench
Dowling, Hotchkiss, Ingraham, Laughlin
Cited by
5 cases
Authority
More cited than 23.8%

The opinion

Hotchkiss, J.:

I concur with the learned presiding justice. The construction given to the word “ election,” as found in article 2 of the Constitution, does not require that the word shall be similarly defined and limited when used in criminal or other statutes which have for their object the purity of the ballot and its protection from fraud whenever, at the polls, the people seek to express themselves upon any question, whether it be in the' choice of candidates for office or on any other matter. In brief, I think the word “election” is susceptible of different constructions, according to “the subject-matter, and the context, the apparent policy and objects of the Legislature.” (State v. Hirsch, 125 Ind. 207, 213 , quoting Endlich Interp. Stat. § 337.)

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.