People v. Scheinman
| Citation | 65 N.E.2d 750,295 N.Y. 142 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. SCHEINMAN. PEOPLE v. SPANIER. |
| Decision Date | 24 January 1946 |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
Louis Scheinman and Abraham Spanier were convicted of violating New York City's Sanitary Code, s 148, regulation 27. Orders of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, 269 App.Div. 788, 55 N.Y.S.2d 314, reversed judgments of the magistrate sitting as a Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Borough of Queens, De Andrea, M., and dismissed the complaints, and the cases were brought before Court of Appeals upon a certificate of chief judge of the Court of Appeals pursuant to Code Cr.Proc. s 520, subd. 3.
Order of Appellate Division and judgment of Court of Special Sessions as to each defendant reversed and new trial ordered. Ignatius M. Wilkinson, Corp. Counsel, of New York City (Henry J. Shields and James Hall Prothero, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
Avrum J. Schrager, of Rockaway Beach, and Abner H. Pike, of Rockaway Park, for respondents.
After trial before a magistrate sitting as Court of Special Sessions in accordance with article VIII of the New York City Criminal Courts Act, the defendants were convicted of having on several occasions unlawfully kept food that was unfit for human consumption.
The charges were laid under section 148 of the Sanitary Code of the City of New York and regulation 27 of the Board of Health of the City. Section 148 provides: ‘No building, room, or place, where food is prepared, cooked, mixed, backed, smoked, preserved, exposed, bottled, packed, handled, stored, or manufactured, shall be conducted, operated, maintained, or used otherwise than in accordance with the regulations of the Board of Health.’ Regulation 27 says: ‘Food which has become unfit for human consumption, shall be kept separate and apart from other foodstuffs which are held, kept, and offered for sale, properly denatured, marked ‘Condemned’ and removed daily.'
At each of the times in issue, the defendants concededly kept at their place of business eggs that were unfit for human consumption, without having denatured them or marked them ‘Condemned’ and without having separated them from other foodstuffs that were then and there offered for sale. The People gave evidence that in each instance the eggs had previously been candled i.e., tested as to quality by being held between...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Mackell
...matter of law. (People v. Peck, 205 N.Y. 554, 98 N.E. 1111; People v. Bellows, 281 N.Y. 67, 74--75, 22 N.E.2d 238, 241; People v. Scheinman, 295 N.Y. 142, 65 N.E.2d 750; Cohen and Karger, Powers of the New York Court of Appeals, § 202, pp. A fundamental corollary to the recital rule permitt......
-
People v. Klose
...a new trial (People v. Bellows, 281 N.Y. 67, 73, 22 N.E.2d 238, 240; People v. Rudolph, 303 N.Y. 73, 100 N.E.2d 142; People v. Scheinman, 295 N.Y. 142, 65 N.E.2d 750; People v. Potskowski, 298 N.Y. 299, 83 N.E.2d 125; People v. Lee, 308 N.Y. 302, 125 N.E.2d The questions before us, therefor......
-
People v. Nappi
...C.J., and FULD, BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN and KEATING, JJ., concur. Order reversed and a new trial ordered. * Followed in People v. Scheinman, 295 N.Y. 142, 65 N.E.2d 750; People v. Potskowski, 298 N.Y. 299, 83 N.E.2d 125; People v. Rudolph, 303 N.Y. 73, 100 N.E.2d 142; People v. Lee, 308 N.Y......
-
People v. Potskowski
...case of the defendant LaDue and in his case there must be a new trial. See People v. Bellows, 281 N.Y. 67, 22 N.E.2d 238;People v. Scheinman, 295 N.Y. 142, 65 N.E.2d 750. Whether the Appellate Division also erred when it modified the judgments against the defendants Potskowski and Capuano i......