State v. Sukoff

CourtNew Hampshire Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtKENISON
CitationState v. Sukoff, 192 A.2d 622, 105 N.H. 70 (N.H. 1963)
Decision Date09 July 1963
PartiesSTATE v. Henry SUKOFF.

William Maynard, Atty. Gen., Irma A. Matthews, Law Asst. and Robert A. Carignan, County Atty., for the State.

Alfred Catalfo, Jr., Dover, for defendant.

KENISON, Chief Justice.

The issue in this case is whether an ordinance adopted by the selectmen of the town of Rollinsford is a valid defense to a prosecution for selling merchandise on Sunday. The defendant contends that it is a valid defense while the State maintains that the ordinance has no present force or effect and cannot bcome effective until it is approved by a majority vote of the legal voters present and voting at the next regular election of the town.

RSA 578:4 prohibiting the sale of merchandise on Sunday with certain exceptions is given some flexibility by RSA 578:5. This latter statute provides that selectmen may adopt ordinances permitting and regulating retail business '* * * on the Lord's Day, provided such * * * ordinances are approved by a majority vote of the legal voters present and voting at the next regular election. * * *' The defendant urges that RSA 578:5 should be construed to hold that the ordinance adopted by the selectmen 'becomes valid and remains valid until such time as the town voters meet at their regular meeting.' The answer to that contention was made at the beginning of the legislative session in January 1961 in Mason v. Town of Salem, 103 N.H. 166, 168, 167 A.2d 433, 435: 'When the Legislature has desired that regulations by selectmen shall be immediately effective until approved or rescinded by the voters, they have usually made explicit provision therefor. See RSA 31:41, 42 regulating open-air motion picture theaters.' It is significant that no changes in the Sunday laws to give selectmen interim powers to make regulations and ordinances effective immediately have been made in either the 1961...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
3 cases
  • Public Service Co. v. Shannon
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • July 9, 1963
    ... ... State v. 4.7 Acres of Land, 95 N.H. 291, 295, 62 A.2d 732. Finally the contention that an existing easement of another utility over the defendant's land ... ...
  • Dixon v. State
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • September 30, 1963
    ...reaffirmed in Riendeau v. Municipal Court of Milford, 104 N.H. 33, 34, 177 A.2d 396. In 1963 these cases were followed in State v. Sukoff, 105 N.H. ----, 192 A.2d 622. These decisions are controlling in this proceeding. Upon the record, briefs and argument in this case we can find no occasi......
  • State v. Rogers
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • May 26, 1964
    ...what merchandise and commodities could be sold in Dover on Sunday was never submitted to the voters and is not operative. State v. Sukoff, 105 N.H. 70, 192 A.2d 622. The activities of the defendants were therefore governed by the provisions of RSA The record is insufficient to permit an ade......