From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Cipperly

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 19, 1886
4 N.E. 107 (N.Y. 1886)

Summary

In People v. Cipperly, 37 Hun 324, a similar statute of New York was pronounced unconstitutional upon the ground that it deprived the defendant of his liberty and property without due process of law, in that it deprived him of the right upon trial to have the issue determined according to the evidence of the fact, and compelled him to submit to the statutory declaration of the fact without having the truth ascertained.

Summary of this case from State v. Campbell

Opinion

Argued December 21, 1885

Decided January 19, 1886

D. Cady Herrick for appellant.

Eugene Burlingame for respondent.


Per Curiam mem. for reversal of judgment of General Term and for affirmance of judgment of Special Sessions.

All concur.

Judgment accordingly.


Summaries of

People v. Cipperly

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 19, 1886
4 N.E. 107 (N.Y. 1886)

In People v. Cipperly, 37 Hun 324, a similar statute of New York was pronounced unconstitutional upon the ground that it deprived the defendant of his liberty and property without due process of law, in that it deprived him of the right upon trial to have the issue determined according to the evidence of the fact, and compelled him to submit to the statutory declaration of the fact without having the truth ascertained.

Summary of this case from State v. Campbell
Case details for

People v. Cipperly

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Appellant, v . ARTHUR CIPPERLY, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jan 19, 1886

Citations

4 N.E. 107 (N.Y. 1886)
4 N.E. 107

Citing Cases

State v. Campbell

Similar statutes in other jurisdictions have been held constitutional. (Commonwealth v. Farren, 9 Allen 489;…

Nebbia v. New York

Many of these regulations have been unsuccessfully challenged on constitutional grounds. See People v.…