From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nash v. White's Bank of Buffalo

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Apr 19, 1887
11 N.E. 946 (N.Y. 1887)

Summary

In Nash v. White's Bank of Buffalo (105 N.Y. 243) the Legislature, by enactment and repeal of other acts, destroyed plaintiff's right to recover certain penalties imposed upon banks for taking unlawful interest. It is manifest, however, that the abatement of penalties inflicted by way of punishment for violations of law is very different, even though it destroys a cause of action vested in a private individual, from the impairment of vested rights resting upon contract express or implied.

Summary of this case from Young v. City of Rochester

Opinion

Argued March 8, 1887

Decided April 19, 1887

Sherman S. Rogers for appellant.

Joel L. Walker for respondent.


We are of opinion that the effect of the act of 1880 (Chap. 567) was to repeal the penalties imposed by chapter 163 of the laws of 1870, and that consequently this action, which was brought under the act of 1870, could no longer be maintained, the act of 1880 containing no provision saving pending actions or existing rights of action.

The provisions of the general repealing act of 1828 (§§ 6, 7) related only to the acts repealed by that statute and had no effect on subsequent legislation. ( Mongeon v. People, 55 N.Y. 613. )

If the act of 1870 was repealed by the act of 1880 the subsequent legislation cannot affect this case, for it could not revive an extinguished cause of action.

The judgment should be reversed and complaint dismissed.

All concur, except DANFORTH, J., not voting.

Judgment reversed.


Summaries of

Nash v. White's Bank of Buffalo

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Apr 19, 1887
11 N.E. 946 (N.Y. 1887)

In Nash v. White's Bank of Buffalo (105 N.Y. 243) the Legislature, by enactment and repeal of other acts, destroyed plaintiff's right to recover certain penalties imposed upon banks for taking unlawful interest. It is manifest, however, that the abatement of penalties inflicted by way of punishment for violations of law is very different, even though it destroys a cause of action vested in a private individual, from the impairment of vested rights resting upon contract express or implied.

Summary of this case from Young v. City of Rochester
Case details for

Nash v. White's Bank of Buffalo

Case Details

Full title:SAMUEL W. NASH, Respondent, v . WHITE'S BANK OF BUFFALO, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Apr 19, 1887

Citations

11 N.E. 946 (N.Y. 1887)
11 N.E. 946
8 N.Y. St. Rptr. 31

Citing Cases

Young v. City of Rochester

This case, however, fairly involved and rested upon the proposition that the original resolution rescinded…

People v. U. D.R.R. Co.

This does not give to the act a retroactive operation; but there being no clause in the act of 1889 saving…